In a society where the law is often seen as a great equaliser, the reality in Ghana’s justice system suggests otherwise.
The recent lawsuit filed by former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta against the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) has reignited debates about the unequal application of justice and the legal strategies that allow the powerful to evade accountability.
Legal scholar Donkor Selikem Timothy offered a compelling critique of how litigation is often weaponized by the rich to manipulate the judicial process, turning the courtroom into a battlefield where power and money dictate the outcome rather than the merits of the case.
At the heart of Timothy’s argument is the assertion that justice in Ghana is not delayed by accident; rather, it is a deliberate strategy used by the wealthy to suspend their legal fate.
According to him, the fundamental premise is that the law, as Karl Marx famously argued, is shaped by economic relationships and serves the interests of the ruling class.
“That holds if you approach the issue from a historically materialistic outlook. [ ignore Hegelian idealism or any normativist account of law ]. Litigation is expensive. Data shows that justice is expedited against the poor rather than the rich. Yes!.
“It is all about economics, and economics is about power. If you are poor, you can be tried and convicted on the same day. If you are rich, maybe after 10 years of legal contest”.
Donkor Selikem Timothy, a Ghanaian legal scholar and writer
Meanwhile, Timothy contended that the rich exploit procedural loopholes, filing numerous applications and appeals to frustrate the judicial process.
The Ken Ofori-Atta lawsuit provides a textbook example of this phenomenon. Declared a “wanted” man by the OSP for failing to present himself for questioning in an ongoing corruption probe, Ofori-Atta quickly turned to the courts to challenge his designation.
His legal action raises important constitutional questions about the limits of the OSP’s authority, but beyond the legal technicalities lies a deeper issue—the ability of the wealthy to dictate the pace of justice.
“Murder in Kyebi Palace”
Timothy drew historical parallels to reinforce his argument, citing Ghana’s most litigated case in the 1940s, the infamous “Murder in Kyebi Palace”.
In that case, prominent lawyer and politician J.B. Danquah, along with a team of seven other legal luminaries, mounted an aggressive legal defense for the accused, filing 19 applications in an attempt to obstruct the trial.
Despite overwhelming evidence, the case dragged on for years, illustrating how legal maneuvering can be used as a shield for the powerful.
“Years will pass, and witness statements haven’t been filed. And that is how justice is bought! You will find these traces in other cases such as * Republic v. Opuni & others – over 9 applications filed * and Republic v. Nyantakyi – over 7 applications filed.
“These cases have been delayed in the courts for more than 5 years. A poor person would have long been convicted”.
Donkor Selikem Timothy, a Ghanaian legal scholar and writer
Timothy strongly contended that the problem is not simply systemic inefficiency—it is a calculated legal strategy.
He emphasized that by overwhelming the courts with motions, injunctions, and stays of proceedings, affluent defendants buy time, erode public interest in their cases, and increase the likelihood that political and legal circumstances will change in their favor.
“The wheels of justice grind slowly” is not an inherent truth
Timothy made a thought-provoking observation: “The wheels of justice grind slowly” is not an inherent truth but a construct of the rich and powerful to delay their reckoning.
He posited that for the poor, there are no wheels—justice moves with ruthless speed, leaving little room for defense.
According to him, the legal system’s deference to powerful lawyers, many of whom command respect from judges, further exacerbates the problem.
He noted that when a high-profile politician appears in court, the courtroom becomes less about adjudicating justice and more about strategic delay—a performance where the rich dictate the rhythm and outcome.
If justice is to serve all, Ghana’s judicial system must undergo structural reform. Timothy proposed reworking procedural rules to minimize the abuse of legal technicalities.
Specifically, he called for tighter restrictions on injunctions and stays of proceedings in criminal trials.
These measures would prevent accused persons from indefinitely halting their trials under the guise of procedural disputes.
However, such reforms raise uncomfortable questions. The very individuals who benefit from the current system—politicians, influential lawyers, and business elites—are the ones with the power to initiate change.
“Will they willingly dismantle a system that protects them?” Timothy posed this question with skepticism, leaving readers to ponder whether the constitutional review process will finally address this issue or if Ghana will remain trapped in a cycle where justice is only for the highest bidder.
Ken Ofori-Atta’s lawsuit against the OSP is not just about legal technicalities; it is a case study in how power manipulates the legal system to avoid accountability.
The broader concern is whether Ghana can create a court system that is truly functional—one that prioritizes justice over delay, substance over legal theatrics, and fairness over privilege.
Until then, the divide between justice for the rich and justice for the poor will remain an enduring stain on Ghana’s democracy.
READ ALSO: Experts Warn Against Government’s MIIF Fund Diversion
