Professor Stephen Kweku Asare, Democracy and Development Fellow at the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) has strongly criticized Chief Justice (CJ), Her Ladyship Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo’s reconstitution of the original panel hearing the high-profile Opuni trial.
Professor Asare argued that the CJ’s decision to reconstitute the trial panel constitutes a profound overreach of administrative authority, undermining the bedrock principles of judicial independence and the rule of law.
“The CJ traversed this sacred principle in the Opuni case by reconstituting the original panel, inserting herself as the President of the new panel that proceeded to issue the unanimous decision that a substitute trial judge who is not satisfied that he or she can adopt the proceedings thus far must nevertheless do so rather than do a de novo trial”.
Professor Stephen Kweku Asare, Democracy and Development Fellow at the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development
According to him, the administrative overreach compromises the integrity of the judicial system, setting a dangerous precedent for future cases
Professor Asare, while explaining his position, contended that once a court panel is formed, the cause list is issued, and hearings commence, the Chief Justice no longer holds administrative authority over the panel’s composition.
This authority, he asserted transfers to the judicial domain of the panel itself, adding that the principle is clear and inviolable, meant to safeguard the independence of the judiciary from external influences.
Erosion of Procedural Norms and Public Trust
Professor Asare in a detailed explanation, outlined several critical reasons why he posit the Chief Justice’s actions must not be allowed to stand.
For several reasons, the Democracy and Development Fellow at the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development asserted that the reconstitution of the panel by the CJ undermines the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.
This move according to him can be perceived as a form of administrative interference, which is detrimental to the fairness of the judicial process.
“Adhering to established legal procedures is essential for upholding the rule of law. By reconstituting the panel after hearings had begun, the CJ violated procedural norms, setting a dangerous precedent that could lead to arbitrary decision-making”.
Professor Stephen Kweku Asare, Democracy and Development Fellow at the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development
Highlighting the negative impact of the Chief Justice’s action on the integrity of the judiciary, Professor Asare noted that the integrity of the judicial system is irreparably compromised when administrative actions manipulate the composition of judicial panels.
He strongly argued that judges must be free to deliberate and decide cases without external pressures.
On the other hand, the renowned legal practitioner also posited that parties involved in a case have the right to a fair trial by a duly constituted bench, arguing that changing the panel mid-trial can be seen as prejudicial and may affect the outcome of the case.
He emphasized that judicial decisions must be based on the consistent and predictable application of the law, asserting that administrative interference disrupts this consistency, potentially leading to erratic legal precedents.
“The judiciary functions as a check on the other branches of government, including administrative actions. If the CJ’s overreach is allowed to stand, it weakens this critical system of checks and balances”.
Professor Stephen Kweku Asare, Democracy and Development Fellow at the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development
Underscoring the Chief Justice’s action on public confidence in the judiciary, Professor Stephen Kweku Asare recounted that the public’s confidence in the judicial system depends on its transparency and adherence to legal norms.
He argued that administrative overreach and opacity like that of the Chief Justice’s decision to reconstitute the original panel hearing the Opuni’s trial damages the judiciary’s credibility, leading to a loss of faith in the country’s legal institutions.
In addition, Professor Asare stated that legal procedures are designed to protect the rights of all parties involved, arguing that bypassing these procedures through administrative actions undermines due process and can lead to unjust outcomes.
He vehemently opined that the Supreme Court justices are not like ministers, nor is the Chief Justice like the President to wield the power to reshuffle associate justices on cases in the same manner as the President reshuffles ministers.
Call to Action
Professor Asare, representing the views of the advocacy group, Good Governance (GOGO) insisted that the Chief Justice reconstitution of the original panel of Opuni’s trial, an administrative overreach must not be allowed to stand.
He emphasized that the Chief Justice must rectify the perceived administrative overreach to uphold the rule of law and to ensure that justice is administered impartially and consistently,
He admonished that there is nothing more dangerous to a country than an “imperial CJ,” underscoring his group’s commitment to challenge the Chief Justice’s decision to uphold the rule of law and ensure that justice is administered impartially and consistently.
READ ALSO: Niger Terminates French Nuclear Fuel Producer’s License
