EOCO Affidavit Clarifies That Gabriel Tanko Atokple Was Not Declared “Wanted”

The Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) has clarified, through an affidavit submitted at the Adenta High Court, that Gabriel Tanko Kwamigah-Atokple and the directors of Sesi-Edem Company Ltd have never been declared wanted persons by the agency.

This clarification forms part of EOCO’s affidavit in opposition to an application for an interlocutory injunction filed by Sesi-Edem Company Limited. In paragraph 19 of the affidavit, EOCO firmly stated that at no point has it issued or published any formal “wanted” notice against Gabriel Tanko Kwamigah-Atokple or the company’s directors. The agency emphasized that its official website serves as the primary platform for publishing such notices, and no such listing exists concerning the individuals in question.

EOCO further explained that the claims by the applicants appear to stem from a general press release issued on March 30, 2026. According to the agency, this release was published prior to the granting of an ex-parte interim injunction and was intended solely as a response to ongoing media discussions and public speculation surrounding the matter.

The agency stressed that the referenced press release does not constitute a formal declaration of any individual as wanted. Instead, it was a routine communication aimed at addressing misinformation and providing clarity to the public during a period of heightened media attention.

Additionally, EOCO noted that the continued online availability of the March 30 press statement should not be misconstrued as a renewed or sustained declaration of wanted status. The agency reiterated that neither Gabriel Tanko Kwamigah-Atokple nor the directors of Sesi-Edem Company Limited have ever been placed on any official wanted list.

This clarification comes amid ongoing legal proceedings initiated by Sesi-Edem Company Limited. The company had sought court orders to restrain EOCO from allegedly maintaining a “wanted” declaration and to prevent the agency from interfering with its business operations and the activities of its directors.

The case remains under judicial consideration at the Adenta High Court, with both parties continuing to contest the legal and factual issues arising from EOCO’s investigations, public statements, and the broader implications of the dispute.