He described the argument canvassed against the DSS operation as puerile.
He said the allegations of bribe-taking against the judges, especially as they have to do with election cases, can cause a breach of security which falls within the mandate of DSS. His words:
"That is a very puerile interpretation of the mandate of the DSS. The DSS is established to maintain internal security through intelligence operations.
"I think it’s got to a stage where judicial corruption was beginning to threaten internal security in the sense that if you look at the case of elections, for example, taking bribes and declaring somebody, who lost an election or who did not win an election, as the winner, particularly, those who first bribed the Independent National Electoral Commission, then engaged in killing people and destroying properties in order to get there.
"If such people’s elections are upheld, that threatens internal security because the other party, knowing that the party that was declared winner did not win the election or that there was no election, and that the party got there by a combination of bloody combat and bribery of the judiciary, will also tend to resort to force of arms and then you can have a disintegration of the society.
"So when bribery gets out of hand and the consequences are becoming devastating, it can create conflict within the society and that, in my view, can result in a breach of security."
DSS free to carry out its operations, say Police
On the role of police in the raids, Force Public Relations Officer, Donald Awunah, said police and the DSS engaged in inter-agency collaboration, but the arrest of the judges was not a joint operation.
Awunah said the DSS had the right to carry out its operations without involving the police.
“You cannot say the non-involvement of the police in the operation by the DSS amounted to lack of confidence in the Force. We engaged in inter-service collaboration from time to time, but the DSS is free to carry out its own operation alone without involving us,” he stated.
