Legal counsel for Sesi-Edem Company Limited, the firm owned by Council of State member Gabriel Tanko Kwamigah-Atokple, has issued a rebuttal to media reports claiming that the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) is “free to investigate” the company.
In a press statement released on Saturday, 25th April 2026, Knightscild Chambers clarified that the interim injunction granted by the High Court on 14th April 2026 remains fully in force. The firm described assertions that the injunction had expired as “wrong as a matter of law and fact”, citing specific civil procedure rules that extend such orders once an interlocutory application is filed.
The legal battle intensified following an affidavit filed by EOCO on 21st April 2026, in which the anti-graft agency reportedly claimed it never actually declared the company’s directors “wanted”. According to the filing, EOCO’s previous press releases were merely intended for “media engagement”.
Lawyers for Sesi-Edem described this admission as “remarkable”, arguing that it represents a “naked abuse of power” and a “serious misuse of institutional authority”. The firm maintained that EOCO was fully aware that the directors were not fugitives, making the “wanted” publications a calculated attempt to undermine the company following previous adverse court findings.
In a significant internal development, the Governing Board of EOCO has formally intervened in the standoff. By a directive dated 22nd April 2026, the Board Secretary, Sedina Gbeve, instructed EOCO management to strictly adhere to directives by the court.
“The Board communicated to this firm that it has directed the Management of EOCO to strictly comply with the injunction for as long as it remains in force,” the statement from Knightscild Chambers noted, adding that management is not at liberty to ignore this internal directive.
This latest friction follows a 19th March 2026 ruling by the High Court, Adenta (Court 1), which held that EOCO had already acted “outside its statutory mandate” regarding the Sesi-Edem investigation.
On 23rd April 2026, another High Court judge noted the need for consistency and adjourned the current interlocutory application pending a directive from the Chief Justice on whether the case should be consolidated before a single court.
Knightscild Chambers concluded by demanding an immediate retraction from media outlets, suggesting the investigation is ongoing and warning that such publications may amount to contempt of court.
