The Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice has filed an opposition to a judicial review application seeking to compel the Ghana Police Service to release investigative documents, arguing that the request is legally unfounded and threatens the integrity of ongoing investigations.

In an affidavit sworn by State Attorney Nana Asante Akyeampong, on behalf of the Attorney-General, the state urged the High Court in Accra to dismiss the application as “incompetent and without merit.”

The application, filed by William Kofi Yirenkyi, is seeking an order of mandamus to compel the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) to release certain police investigation reports and statements. The request follows earlier demands made by the Right to Information Commission in January and April 2025.

The applicant claims the refusal to release the documents violates his rights and warrants judicial intervention under the court’s supervisory jurisdiction.

However, the Attorney-General’s office maintains that the application fails to meet the legal requirements for the grant of an order of mandamus.

According to the affidavit, for mandamus to be granted, an applicant must demonstrate:

The existence of a statutory duty imposed on the respondent,

That the duty is of a public nature,

A clear legal right to enforce that duty and evidence of a demand and refusal.

The state argues that the applicant has failed on all these grounds.

“The application discloses no public duty imposed on the 1st Respondent to share police investigative reports and statements,” the affidavit stated.

A central pillar of the state’s opposition is the confidentiality of police investigations. The Attorney-General’s office emphasised that investigative reports and statements from suspects are strictly confidential and cannot be disclosed to individuals with no direct connection to the case.

It further argued that such confidentiality is necessary to:

Protect the integrity of criminal investigations,

Safeguard the rights of suspects and accused persons and prevent undue interference in the justice process.

“The sharing of police investigative reports… cannot be termed a public duty nor in the public interest,” the affidavit noted.

The state also challenged the applicant’s standing in the case, noting that he failed to establish any direct link to the investigation in question.

Although the applicant reportedly claimed to be a complainant, the affidavit pointed out that this claim was not supported by sworn evidence, as required under procedural rules.

As such, the Attorney-General argues that the applicant lacks the “sufficient interest” necessary to enforce any alleged duty.

Deputy AG challenges OSP's jurisdictional bounds at the Supreme Court

The opposition relies on several judicial authorities, including Supreme Court rulings, to support its position that:

Mandamus is a discretionary remedy,

It can only be granted where a clear statutory duty exists and courts may refuse the order where there are justifiable reasons for non-compliance.

The state also highlighted that even where a duty exists, courts may decline to grant mandamus if refusal to act is justified in the public interest.

The Attorney-General’s office concluded that the application is an improper attempt to invoke the court’s supervisory powers for personal interest rather than public good.

It is therefore asking the High Court to dismiss the case in its entirety.



AM

Dr Nyaho Nyaho-Tamakloe on Ghana's past, present and the road ahead