EOCO chases MP: Can Section 41 cure lacuna in EOCO Act? – Inusah Fuseini asks

Former Tamale Central MP Inusah Fuseini has questioned the legal foundation for forcing an individual to appear before the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) when they decline to answer questions. Discussing the incident on JoyNews’ Newsfile, Fuseini highlighted "disturbing" legal issues stemming from the confrontation between Manhyia South MP Nana Agyei Baffour Awuah and EOCO officials.

"There are disturbing aspects of the case, and there are issues in my studies in jurisprudence that will allow me to ask and ask them as questions," he stated.

Fuseini referred to Section 19 of the Economic and Organised Crime Office Act 2010, which grants the EOCO Executive Director the power to invite or compel a person to appear for investigative purposes. However, he posed the question of what happens when a person refuses to comply and if another constitutional provision could fill the identified legal gap.

He pointed out that Section 19 empowers EOCO to request a person's presence for investigation, and when refused, the lacuna may be addressed by Section 41 of the Constitution.

Despite raising the legal concern, Fuseini affirmed his agreement with EOCO's interpretation of Parliament's Standing Orders, established practices and conventions, and relevant laws. He clarified that the letter from EOCO seeking the MP's attendance should not be treated as a court process. Denying that the letter was judicial, Fuseini analyzed the initial interaction between the EOCO officers and Awuah, suggesting the security personnel were merely explaining the purpose of the visit.

This account follows the incident at the Accra High Court on September 23, where Baffour Awuah and EOCO personnel clashed. The episode has sparked discussions about the scope of EOCO's investigative authority, the protocols for issuing invitations, and the connection between these powers and parliamentary privileges.