Private legal practitioner, Martin Kpebu believes Ghana’s Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) missed an opportunity when it initially rejected Ken Ofori-Atta’s offer to speak via video conferencing from the United States.
Kpebu explained that Ofori-Atta’s offer should have been accepted as a “Plan B” to take caution and charge statements.
According to him, this would have allowed for the initiation of trial in absentia should he fail to return to Ghana.
“When he first made those overtures, the OSP didn’t take it. We should have had a Plan B. Nothing stopped us from taking a Plan B,” he said, referencing the biblical parable of the wise maidens with extra oil.
He argued that taking the statements abroad is possible through the Mutual Legal Assistance Act and cautioned against missing similar chances going forward.
He clarified that in criminal trials, an accused person is not obligated to incriminate themselves, and a case can still proceed in court even if the accused refuses to make a statement.
“Even if the accused says ‘no comment’ or refuses to write anything, the law allows the trial to proceed,” Kpebu said, citing examples from past cases including the infamous Coop-Lotus trial.
He added that the real responsibility lies with the prosecution to prove their case, and that further interrogation is not a legal prerequisite to entering court.
According to him, what matters most are the caution and charge statements.
Even if the accused declines to respond, the attempt by prosecutors to elicit those statements is often sufficient.
