The office of the Chief Justice should not be a casualty of politics
The piece underscores the imperative of safeguarding the judiciary—particularly the Office of the Chief Justice—from partisan capture to maintain institutional integrity. It highlights the risks of political interference, public mistrust, and investor uncertainty arising from the current tensions surrounding the Chief Justice’s appointment and advocates for transparent, merit-based processes to preserve judicial independence and uphold democratic stability.
Introduction
In every democratically elected country, no one loses sight of the independence of the judiciary and its function in bringing justice to the doorsteps of every citizen. Thus, it can be emphatically established that the judiciary, as an organ of government, plays a crucial role in the justice delivery system of every country. In the year 2025, Ghana faces a tremendous bane regarding who should occupy the office of the Chief Justice. Specifically, on the 10th of November, 2025, there were heated arguments between the majority and minority caucuses of Parliament on the vetting of His Lordship Paul Baffoe-Bonnie as the Chief Justice following the removal of Her Ladyship Gertrude Torkornoo as the Chief Justice on some stated grounds of misconduct. This article discusses the need to exclude the office of the Chief Justice as a political office and a casualty of politics.
Rising Matters
The current uncertainty in the judicial arm of government has created a vacuum of doubt that raises the question: Would the next government remove the serving Chief Justice? In all its achievements, a single act can make a government unpopular when its actions are prejudicial to the outcome of the justice delivery system. The very nature of the judicial arm of government is its peculiar attribute of staying independent and free from any form of external control. It has been provided under Article 125 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana that the judiciary shall be independent and subject only to the Constitution. The current tension about who occupies the office of the Chief Justice has become overly political, causing citizens to lose interest in the whole procedure. To maintain a true separation of powers and public confidence, the office of the Chief Justice must remain above partisan politics.
Under Article 125(4) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the Chief Justice is the head of the judiciary and is responsible for the administration and supervision of the judiciary. Throughout the 1992 Constitution, the Chief Justice has been given constitutionally established roles that safeguard the democracy of the nation. Such a sensitive office should not be politicised.
Judicial Independence versus Political Influence
Under Article 144 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the Chief Justice is appointed by the President acting in consultation with the Council of State and with the approval of Parliament. Relying on the doctrine of separation of powers and checks and balances, it can be said that each organ of government complements the other while staying independent and without control. There is an alleged potential for political interference when the executive arm of government appoints a Chief Justice. This is often alleged even more when the ruling party dominates Parliament. With the current tension concerning the office of the Chief Justice, it leads to one conclusion: that there is a perceived bias and irregularity concerning the office. It further leads to a striking point that might rest on the hearts of the citizenry — that the justice delivery system cannot be trusted.
The Need to Prevent Politicisation of the Judiciary
Ghana holds diplomatic relations with other countries, and the act of politicising the judicial arm of government does not in any way promote the image of Ghana. With the notion that the office of the Chief Justice is political, it derails and may certainly prevent potential investors from investing in the country.
Also, judges, being human, are not immune to personal feelings or external influences, which may at times unconsciously affect their decisions. Thus, there is a presumption in favour of ruling for the political party that led the judge’s appointment. Justice must always be administered without emotions, prejudice, or political influence.
The Converging Point
As already expressed, the Chief Justice is not a political appointee but the guardian of the Constitution. Protecting the office of the Chief Justice is crucial for the rule of law, democracy, and public confidence. Let no man, in furtherance of personal gain, turn the constitutionally protected office of the Chief Justice into a casualty of politics. The appointment and vetting process should be transparent and based on merit, because when the gavel becomes an instrument of politics, justice itself is silenced. Ghana must guard against that.
The writer is Nicholas Nii Boye Armah of the UPSA Law School and a member of EyisonDeiAmoah and Associates student law firm
NB: Kindly note that views and perspectives expressed or canvassed in articles are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the views of DL News. They are published purely for academic purposes.
