Lawyers of the Judicial Service of Ghana have advised media houses in the country to refrain from publishing hateful, indecent and offensive statements against judges.
Contained in a statement, it stated that there’s a concern over the lack of discretion and responsibilities of some media houses’ engagement in incendiary comments against Judges.
According to the legal practitioners, the worry basically, “arises from the publication and/or permitting the publication of a series of incendiary, hateful and offensive statements, and speeches on their various platforms against the lawyers.
“This concern has been heightened by the flurry of statements and speeches directed at our clients’ Justices, especially after the commencement of hearing of the election petition in the suit [between] John Dramani Mahama v Electoral Commission & Nana Addo”.
Buttressing its point further, the legal counsel noted that publishing hateful and offensive stories against adjudicators threaten the democracy and peaceful nature of the country.
“Publications directly insinuate that the decisions of the Justices presiding over the matter are motivated by factors outside legal principles and proper judicial consideration.
“The focus of the statements and speeches therefore patently insinuate that… the decisions are motivated by corrupt factors and devoid of any legal justification and/or reasoning.”
In furtherance of this, they as a result, stressed on the need for media houses to advisedly steer clear off “statements and speeches”, which “interfere with the due administration of justice as Justices of our clients are threatened with ominous consequences following their decisions which do not meet the expectations of some members of the society.
“The statements and speeches bring the administration of justice into disrepute as unsuspecting Ghanaians are being deliberately misinformed and manipulated to believe that the justice system is perverted and lacking in credibility”.
Justifying its stance further, the statement explained that the statement and speeches by these media outlets threatens “our constitutional order and democracy,” which it perceived that, “an important arm of the government is being vilified and disparaged with impunity”.
It also elaborated on the state of Ghanaian population which “consists largely of uneducated or not very well-informed people”, as such “it is necessary to take a stricter view of what criticism may be allowed of the justice system”, because “although the administration of justice must suffer the respectful though outspoken [not inciteful, hateful or spiteful] comments of ordinary men, it must not be adversely interfered with and/or brought into dispute”.
That notwithstanding, it revealed that media firms who act contrary to the stipulations will result in the appropriate actions taken against them.
“We have our clients’ instructions to take appropriate action to ensure that you do not abuse the right to free speech by deploying and/or permitting your platform to be deployed in a manner that not only threatens our constitutional order and democracy”.
READ ALSO : Petitioner’s Application for Review Dismissed By Supreme Court
