Manasseh, whose earlier investigative work played a major role in exposing the procurement scandal, says he is worried about what he describes as unclear procedures, unanswered questions, and unexplained decisions being made by the OSP as the trial progresses.
His concerns were shared in a detailed letter addressed to legal activist Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, also known as Kwaku Azar.
According to Manasseh, one of the biggest issues involves the OSP’s decision to drop a critical charge against Adjei.
According to Manasseh, one of the biggest issues involves the OSP’s decision to drop a critical charge against Adjei.
He noted that under former Special Prosecutor Martin Amidu, investigators reported strange and unexplained deposits made into the former PPA boss’s bank accounts.
These findings, he explained, raised serious questions about possible hidden assets and sources of wealth.
However, Manasseh believes that the current OSP has not shown enough progress in tracing these assets or explaining why certain charges related to them no longer appear in the case.
He argued that if the previous investigators detected unusual financial activity, then the public deserves to know whether those leads were followed or abandoned — and why.
Another matter that troubles the journalist is what he calls inconsistent communication by the Special Prosecutor.
He revealed that after raising questions in the past, he was assured that a full response would be provided within two weeks.
However, Manasseh believes that the current OSP has not shown enough progress in tracing these assets or explaining why certain charges related to them no longer appear in the case.
He argued that if the previous investigators detected unusual financial activity, then the public deserves to know whether those leads were followed or abandoned — and why.
Another matter that troubles the journalist is what he calls inconsistent communication by the Special Prosecutor.
He revealed that after raising questions in the past, he was assured that a full response would be provided within two weeks.
But according to him, the deadline passed without answers.
A month after that, he says he received yet another explanation — this time with no clear timelines at all.
To him, these delays weaken public trust in the case and leave important issues hanging in the air.
Burden on the Witness Without Clarity
Manasseh also highlighted what he sees as a procedural concern: the heavy reliance on him as a key witness.
He explained that during the earlier stage of the case, he was cross-examined by two different sets of defence lawyers for more than a year.
After all that, some charges were dropped and the case had to restart.
Now, he says, he is being asked to testify again — but without receiving any explanations for the major decisions taken by the OSP.
He posed a question to Ghanaians and legal observers:
“If you were made to go through cross-examination for over a year, only for the case to be reset, would you return to the witness box again without getting answers to the concerns you raised?”
For him, the answer is simple: he will not testify again until the OSP provides clear explanations.
Why the Specific Charge Matters
While Manasseh acknowledged that every prosecutor has the power to drop charges, he insists that one particular charge — relating to direct influence over procurement processes — was a key part of the case.
He has repeatedly asked why this charge was reclassified as only “indirect influence” or removed entirely.
He posed a question to Ghanaians and legal observers:
“If you were made to go through cross-examination for over a year, only for the case to be reset, would you return to the witness box again without getting answers to the concerns you raised?”
For him, the answer is simple: he will not testify again until the OSP provides clear explanations.
Why the Specific Charge Matters
While Manasseh acknowledged that every prosecutor has the power to drop charges, he insists that one particular charge — relating to direct influence over procurement processes — was a key part of the case.
He has repeatedly asked why this charge was reclassified as only “indirect influence” or removed entirely.
The journalist says he has tried several times to get an official justification for this major change but has not received any response.
To him, clarity is important not just for his role as a witness, but for public confidence in the justice system.