By Virgilius Goka
ACCRA — A parliamentary committee vetting nominees to Ghana’s Supreme Court was thrown into controversy this week after Minority members accused the Majority of flouting procedural rules, reigniting long-running “court packing” allegations from both sides of the political divide.
Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile, hosted by Samson Lardi Anyenini, Nana Agyei Baffour Awuah, Vice Chairman of Parliament’s Subsidiary Legislation Committee and a member of the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee, said the Minority raised objections over the vetting process because the required 14-day publication notice under Order 217 of Parliament’s Standing Orders had not been properly observed.
Baffour Awuah said no record existed to show that Parliament had formally suspended the provision through a motion, and questioned whether the Speaker had the sole authority to waive the notice period without one.
“It is not respectfully entirely the matter of the Speaker of Parliament to rule it,” he said, arguing that a motion ought to have been raised and debated before any suspension of the rule.
He rejected suggestions that the Minority had forfeited its right to object by not raising the matter earlier, noting that the vetting of each nominee was conducted separately rather than jointly. “The procedure would have been waived if the Majority had not raised an objection,” he said, adding that once an objection is raised, the committee ought to pause rather than proceed.
Pressed by Anyenini on whether the dispute amounted to political tit-for-tat, Baffour Awuah insisted the matter went beyond partisanship. He argued that the Constitution does not set competence as a qualification for judges, but instead emphasises “high moral character and proven integrity” — a standard he said was being undermined by the politicisation of the process.
Analysts Warn of Damage to Judicial Trust
Dr John Osae-Kwapong, Director of Quality Assurance and Institutional Effectiveness at Ashesi University and a fellow at the Ghana Center for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana), told the programme he was troubled by the Majority and Minority’s inability to find common ground on the process.
He warned that unresolved disputes of this kind could leave a shadow of illegitimacy hanging over nominees even after they are confirmed and sworn into office.
On the recurring “court packing” accusations, Osae-Kwapong noted that the claim tends to resurface with every change in government, with whichever side is out of power levelling the same charge the other side once made. He said he supported proposals to cap the number of Supreme Court justices by law, arguing that a fixed ceiling — rather than one set at the discretion of an incumbent government — would help remove the bench from partisan contention.
Asked by Anyenini about the effect of the dispute on public confidence in the judiciary, Osae-Kwapong pointed to Afrobarometer survey data — from around Round 9 or 10 — showing that partisan rhetoric directed at judicial institutions and personnel does little to build trust in them.
Background
The exchange took place during a vetting session for nominees to Ghana’s Supreme Court, with the Minority’s procedural objection centred on whether the constitutionally and statutorily required notice period was observed before hearings began. Neither the Speaker’s office nor the Majority side’s position on the procedural objection was independently detailed in the segment monitored.
Leave a Reply