Over the past four years, Ghana witnessed an alarming trend where prosecutorial power is wielded as a suppression tool rather than justice.
Legal scholar and practitioner, Donkor Selikem Timothy, in a critical analysis of this phenomenon, highlighted the troubling case of activist Oliver Barker-Vormawor, who has faced relentless legal battles.
According to him, the implications of these actions extend beyond individual cases—they signal a deeper institutional flaw that threatens democracy, civil activism, and the rule of law.
Donkor Selikem Timothy defined prosecutorial persecution as the use of state-sponsored criminal actions not to uphold justice but to harass, intimidate, and financially exhaust individuals.
This strategy, he argued, is designed to silence dissenting voices and weaken political advocacy.
“I have been roaming Courts in the last 4 years from District Court, Ashaiman; Criminal Court 2, Court Complex; District Court, Madina. For what exactly?
“Sometimes to witness the proceedings of charges brought against Oliver Barker-Vormawor but most times, to appear alone or with a senior lawyer as his defence attorney. The charges include treason felony, traffic violation, unlawful assembly and whatnot. A salad of charges.”
Donkor Selikem Timothy, Legal Practitioner and Scholar
Beyond the obvious psychological toll, the financial burden of such prolonged legal battles is immense.
Timothy pointed out that for five years, Barker-Vormawor and his legal team have had to make frequent court appearances, traveling miles at significant personal expense.
Meanwhile, Timothy bemoaned that the state prosecution appeared disinterested in ensuring a speedy trial, making deliberate delays a form of punishment in itself.
“Sometimes we appear in court without the prosecution present,” Timothy revealed, exposing a tactic of attrition where the process, rather than the outcome, becomes the punishment.
With the state’s unlimited resources at the disposal of politicians, the ability to use public funds to settle personal or political scores raises profound concerns.
Who Guards the Guardians?
Timothy posed an unsettling question: “Who watches the persecutor?” He argued that while the state is officially responsible for prosecuting crimes, the reality is that politicians control key legal institutions, including the Attorney General’s Department and the Police Service.
This, according to him, allows them to initiate criminal proceedings under the guise of state action, effectively making them both prosecutors and persecutors.
A pressing concern is the economic cost of such legal abuse. Timothy argued that state resources—money, manpower, and logistics—are expended on prosecutorial persecution, yet there is little accountability for the waste incurred.
He challenged whether a politician could ever be charged with causing financial loss to the state for such abuses.
“If, without believing that a person has committed a crime, that person is arrested, charged, and prosecuted for as long as the regime remains, should it not amount to causing financial loss to the state?
“Could there be a legal precedent where state officers are surcharged for misusing prosecutorial powers? The absence of such accountability emboldens the political class to weaponize the justice system without consequence”.
Donkor Selikem Timothy, Legal Practitioner and Scholar
The Glaring Gap in Ghana’s Legal Framework
Timothy highlighted a critical legal loophole: Ghana’s Constitution provides compensation for wrongful arrest, detention, or conviction under Articles 14(5), (6), and (7).
However, it does not address cases where individuals are subjected to prolonged legal harassment without being convicted or detained unlawfully.
In Barker-Vormawor’s case, he was neither wrongly convicted nor detained beyond legal limits, yet he endured five years of legal persecution. “Where lies his remedy?” Timothy asked.
While common law allows for actions in malicious prosecution, Timothy noted that proving malice is exceptionally difficult. The burden of evidence is high—simply demonstrating that charges were baseless or unreasonable is not enough.
A plaintiff must prove that the prosecutor had an ulterior motive, which is nearly impossible unless explicit evidence—such as a confession or leaked documents—exists.
This raises the question of whether Ghana’s legal framework should be expanded to provide compensation for prosecutorial persecution.
Timothy suggested that if the state later discontinues a politically motivated case, it should be obligated to compensate the victim for the financial and emotional burden endured.
The Call for Legal Reforms
The cases of individuals like Barker-Vormawor, Gregory Afoko, and others highlight the urgent need for constitutional and legal reform.
Timothy suggested whether Ghana should introduce a law that compensates individuals who endure prolonged legal persecution without conviction or should there be penalties for state officials who misuse prosecutorial power for political gain.
He urged a national conversation on this issue, arguing that democracy cannot thrive where justice is weaponized against dissenting voices.
For him, the current system emboldens political actors to wield legal action as a tool of suppression without accountability.
Without reform, Timothy emphasized that civil activism and political advocacy in Ghana will continue to suffer, as individuals will fear that speaking out comes at an unbearable personal cost.
READ ALSO: AEC Defends Coal to Boost Africa’s Growth
