Security Consultant Richard Kumadoe has offered a detailed explanation of how bail amounts and detention periods are determined in Ghana’s financial crime investigations, addressing mounting criticism over the steep bail conditions imposed on several high-profile suspects investigated by the Economic and Organised Crime Office.
Mr Kumadoe, a former Special Officer with the Bureau of National Investigation and currently Managing Consultant at RichQuest Consult, shared his insights in an exclusive interview with The Vaultz News.
The conversation follows sustained political criticism directed at EOCO over its handling of cases involving Dennis Miracles Aboagye, Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi, Abdul-Wahab Hanan Aludiba, and Kofi Akpaloo, all of whom have faced bail conditions ranging from GH¢10 million to GH¢60 million.
Asked what typically determines whether a bail figure is proportionate to an alleged offence or designed to extend detention unnecessarily, Mr Kumadoe began by explaining Ghana’s standard legal position that anyone arrested must either be charged in court or released within 48 hours.
“But then again, it depends on the type of crime you’ve committed, the nature of the crime, the personalities involved, the impact of the crime, and the effect it has on society as a whole, particularly when it comes to fraud, fraudulent activities, and national security breaches”
Richard Kumadoe, Security Consultant
According to Mr Kumadoe, suspects whose arrest marks the very beginning of an investigation are less likely to benefit from the 48-hour window, since investigators will often ask the court for more time to build their case.
By contrast, he explained, suspects arrested after investigators have already completed most of their work, roughly 80 to 90 percent, are more likely to see the 48-hour rule applied.
Bail Reviews Remain Available Through the Courts
Mr Kumadoe stressed that once a bail amount and its accompanying conditions are set, law enforcement officers hold the authority to determine those terms, but suspects who feel the amount is unfair retain the right to challenge it in court.
He pointed to cases from the previous year where bail amounts were successfully reviewed, in some instances reduced and in others increased, depending on the circumstances presented before the court.
He expressed frustration with what he described as inconsistency in public commentary on the issue, noting that even legal practitioners appear divided on where the real problem lies.
Some lawyers, he said, argue that the core issue is not the size of the bail amount itself but the procedures surrounding property registration, court documentation, and the various administrative steps involving the Lands Commission and licensed surveyors before a bail condition can be properly satisfied.
Flight Risk Remains a Genuine Concern
Mr Kumadoe also addressed the argument that some suspects pose no flight risk and should therefore receive more lenient bail terms, rejecting the idea that this determination lies with the public or the accused themselves.
He pointed to a recurring problem in Ghana’s justice system where individuals granted bail have absconded, halting prosecutions altogether, a pattern he said the Attorney General’s office is well aware of. According to Mr Kumadoe, only investigative agencies, not public opinion, hold the authority to assess flight risk when recommending bail conditions.
Turning to the specific calculation behind bail amounts, Mr Kumadoe used the example of a suspect under investigation for GH¢55 million, whose bail was set at GH¢50 million, representing roughly 90 to 91 percent of the total amount allegedly involved.
He explained that this proportional relationship reflects a deliberate determination rather than an arbitrary figure, shaped by multiple factors that come together before a final bail amount is set. He maintained that these decisions do not rest on the discretion of individual officers but follow standard procedures grounded in law.
According to Mr Kumadoe, understanding why a particular bail figure was set often requires insight into the specific details of a case that may not be publicly visible, making it difficult for outside observers to judge the fairness of a bail condition without full access to the underlying facts.
Ongoing Debate Over Accountability
Mr Kumadoe’s remarks add further detail to a broader controversy surrounding EOCO’s conduct in recent months. Critics, led by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, have accused the agency of using unattainable bail benchmarks to keep suspects in custody longer than the law intends, framing the pattern as political persecution disguised as anti-corruption enforcement.
Government and EOCO have rejected this characterisation, pointing to GH¢617.5 million in recovered stolen funds as evidence of law-driven investigation rather than political targeting.
By walking through the mechanics of bail determination in detail, Mr Kumadoe’s explanation offers a technical counterpoint to the political framing that has dominated public discussion of these cases, suggesting that what critics view as excessive bail conditions may instead reflect standard practice tied to the scale of the alleged offence and the specific risks each case presents.
Whether this explanation shifts public perception of EOCO’s methods remains uncertain, but it adds a procedural dimension to a debate that has so far been shaped largely by political rhetoric on both sides.
READ ALSO: Government Accepts GH¢9.98 Billion in Oversubscribed T-Bill Sale
