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
On the 20th July, 2026, the High court presided over by Her Ladyship Justice Audrey…
The central procedural question that arises is whether the principle of natural justice entitles an…
Societies existed long before formal legal systems, and from the beginning of human community, we…
Honourable Chair, one hundred and fifty years ago, a seed was planted. Those who planted…
Lawyers making out of court statements has become so normal that many lawyers and members of…
If you overdraw your bank account to fund a business project, and the bank later…