By J. A. Sarbah
By demanding that Paul Adom-Otchere post two landed properties in his name as bail, the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) has issued not just a legal absurdity but a constitutional insult. If bail now depends on real estate portfolios, then only thieves who have stolen enough to acquire properties can walk free.
What signal does this send to the civil servant or appointee? That it’s safer to be corrupt and own land than be upright and landless. Kissi Agyebeng, wittingly or not, has authored a new doctrine: loot first, so you can post bail later.
This is not anti-corruption fighting. This is legalised bullying wearing a borrowed suit of due process. A bail regime that punishes law-abiding critics while rewarding asset-laden rogues isn’t just dangerous; it is democratic malpractice and a display of naked monstrosity.
The law on bail, rooted in Article 14 of the 1992 Constitution and reinforced by Section 96 of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30), does not equate liberty with landed wealth. Bail is to secure attendance at trial, not to assess a suspect’s worth based on real estate holdings.
When only the corrupt can afford bail, the courtroom becomes a vault for protecting loot – not liberty.
This man isn’t worth the position of SP. Chai, Akuffo-Addo has been misled big time.
J. A. Sarbah | PP Firebrand | VoNC
