ABSTRACT
This article critically examines President John Mahama’s recent Supreme Court nominations in Ghana, situating the process within the constitutional, political, and public discourse. It analyzes the legal framework governing judicial appointments, emphasizing the critical roles of the Judicial Council and Parliament in ensuring the integrity and competence of nominees.
Drawing on both domestic and comparative perspectives-including the United States Senate confirmation process and India’s collegium system-the article highlights recurring criticisms of superficial vetting, partisan influence, and threats to judicial independence. It further explores calls for reform aimed at fostering greater transparency, merit-based selection, and public trust in the judiciary. Through detailed case studies and academic commentary, the article argues that robust, constitutionally sound appointment processes are essential for upholding the Supreme Court’s role as a guardian of Ghana’s democracy and the rule of law. The analysis concludes with practical recommendations for reform and a reaffirmation of the judiciary’s foundational importance in safeguarding Ghana’s constitutional order.
Read the full article below
In Ghana, the principle of access to justice remains a pillar of our constitutional democracy.…
Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public:…
Behind successful startups and growing enterprises, there are often tensions that do not make it…
Women are more impactful when given the freedom to thrive in a world where they…
Unsigned contracts may still be binding where there is evidence of an offer and acceptance;…
Last week the Ghana Bar Association issued a press statement addressing concerns arising from the…