Humans are essentially free-spirited creatures who love to by nature, explore the many options of life.
Nonetheless, there’s always that unrestrained side which when left ‘un-reined’ can pose significant threats to the existential principles that governs the state and by extent, the affairs of men.
For centuries, laws in countries have essentially defined the unfolding events and play out of scenes both in governmental discourse and public life.
While some have touted the unfair nature of some aspects of the rule of law in the country by highlighting the obsolete nature of it which must be amended, those who it favors are comfortably insisting its maintained – well, until it starts to ‘disfavor’ them.
Truly, the 1992 constitution in Ghana has suffered the fate of a child caught in the legal battle of divorced parents.
Over the years, several calls have been made for a review of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution in order to completely make changes to powers granted to the Executive arm of government.
The conversation has suddenly gained momentum with the nomination of three new persons to go on to the Supreme Court following the retirement of some judges recently.
As expected, it has stirred the hornets’ nest as various individuals, particularly from the ‘noble’ profession have exercised their legal lingua franca justifying and or drawing loopholes in the constitution which they reckon President Akufo-Addo has taken to ‘pack’ the Supreme Court.
Invariably, as some have identified a gaping “lacuna” which the President has taken undue advantage of, some have justified his nomination of the judges on the same basis – a vacancy to be filled following the retirement of three judges.
Capitalizing on ‘constitutional lacuna to appoint judges
Constitutional and human rights activist, Abraham Amaliba, criticized the nomination of three additional judges to the Supreme Court, describing it as needless and a wasteful allocation of scarce resources.
He argued that while there is no specific limit to the number of judges that can be appointed by the President, maintaining the current number at the apex court, which is 13, should be sufficient.
On another breath, South Dayi MP, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor expressed disappointment about the nomination since there are no vacancies at the Supreme Court to be filled.
He insisted that the increase is not needed since the court on average is empaneled by five or seven Judges.
Contrarily, the Public Relations Officer (PRO) of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), Saviour Kudze, revealed that it is not wrong for President Akufo-Addo to replace retired Supreme Court Judges.
According to him, the Head of State was acting within the tenets of the constitution when he nominated three Justices to fill vacant offices.
“I don’t think that there is any issue about this thing in the sense that the constitution gives us a minimum number of Justices that must be appointed, it does not give us a sealing but practically, what has been happening is that we have been hovering around 15,16…
“Over the years, what has always been done is that when people retire or unfortunately die, new appointments are made to replace them so if at this time you are saying that once we have a minimum of nine, there would be no need for an appointment, I will not agree with that.”
Saviour Kudze
Fundamentally, there is a creeping sense of politicization of the judiciary arm of the government which shouldn’t be so – that is why separation of powers is crucial to the dispassionate running of the country.
Moreover, when there is a break and intrusion in the role of each distinct arm of the government, disorder and agitations will be the least of government’s worry.
Highlighting the near politicization of such important matter, former President, John Dramani Mahama, in September this year accused President Akufo-Addo and his government of piling the Judiciary with judges sympathetic to the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
While the truth or otherwise remains unvouched for, he emphasized that the current government has deliberately and consciously appointed cronies to the third arm of government.
To borrow the words of Samuel Esson Jonah, Knight of the British Empire, KBE, the Constitution in its current state has “created a monstrous Executive which looms large over the other arms of the governance structure”.
Albeit “executocracy”, not democracy, may thrive in the current government, especially with the President having a determining role in the appointment of all the judges of the Supreme Court, including the Chief Justice, there is the need to amend or review the constitution to meet the demands of the current dispensation of governance.
In the United State, nine judges make up the panel of the Supreme Court and the country is thriving economically, and better so than Ghana. This certainly proves in this case that there isn’t much ‘power’ in numbers after all. In light of this, a review should be right up the alley of government to avert the speculation and eventual infiltration of politics into such a ‘noble’ space.
READ ALSO: Constitution Review Consultative Committee Calls For Capping On Ministerial Appointments
