CrimeHot!

Charles Bissue discontinues judicial review against OSP

A presidential staffer and former secretary of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Illegal Mining, Mr Charles Bissue has discontinued his Judicial Review application against the Office of the Special Prosecu­tor(OSP).

Mr Bissue is being prosecuted by the OSP at the Accra High Court, for allegedly accepting mon­ey from undercover journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas.

Mr Bissue filed the motion for judicial review on June 2, on grounds that the OSP breached the provisions of Act 959 when the Office investigated only him excluding Anas Aremeyaw of Tiger Eye PI.

It is the case of Mr Bissue that Anas admitted he was involved in the commission of the offence.

The applicant told the court that he withdrew the motion for judicial review so he would concen­trate on the suit he filed at a differ­ent court seeking the enforcement of his fundamental human rights.

Mr Bissue said the Special Pros­ecutor (SP), Mr Kissi Adjebeng acted irrationally and unfairly because Mr Martin Amidu, had said during his tenure as the SP that he was investigating both him (Bissue) and Mr Aremeyaw.

In the application for judicial review, Mr Bissue wanted the court to declare that upon a true and proper interpretation of the section 3(1)(b) of Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959), it is mandatory for the Office of the Special Prosecutor to inves­tigate and/or prosecute both the public officer and private person(s) involved in the commission of the alleged offence.

He asked the court for a declaration that accordingly, any investigations of the applicant by the respondent must of necessity include investigations of Anas Aremeyaw Anas and Tiger Eye PI.

He asked the court to hold that the investigation of only the applicant by the respondent, with­out investigating Anas Aremeyaw Anas and Tiger Eye PI, is contrary to section 3(1)(b) of Act 959 and therefore unlawful.

Mr Bissue asked the court for an order of certiorari directed at the respondent, quashing the outcome of the aforesaid investi­gation of only the applicant by the respondent for being contrary to section 3(1)(b) of Act 959.

An order of prohibition direct­ed at the respondent, to restrain the Respondent from prosecuting the applicant on the basis of the aforesaid investigation of only the applicant, done by the respondent.

Mr Bissue wanted an order of prohibition directed at the respon­dent, to restrain the respondent from investigating and/or prose­cuting the applicant to the exclu­sion of Anas Aremeyaw Anas and Tiger Eye PI

 BY MALIK SULLEMANA

Show More
Back to top button