CHIEF JUSTICE COMMENTS STIR DEBATE — QUESTIONS RAISED OVER JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY

The controversy follows comments he made during visits to the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) and the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF) on September 2, where he praised improvements under the current administration while questioning how some institutions had been managed over the previous eight years.

‘WHAT HAVE WE BEEN DOING?’

During his visit to MIIF, the Chief Justice expressed admiration for what he had seen and heard about the performance of some state institutions.

He questioned what Ghana had been doing over the previous eight years, remarks that were interpreted by critics as an implicit comparison between the current NDC administration and the previous NPP government.

His comments have since sparked a wider debate about whether the head of the Judiciary should publicly assess the performance of successive governments.

CDD-GHANA CALLS FOR RESTRAINT

The Ghana Center for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) has urged the Chief Justice to exercise the highest possible restraint and discretion in his public engagements.

The organisation warned that comments contrasting the current administration with its predecessor could create a perception of political bias and potentially affect public confidence in the impartiality of the Judiciary.

CRITICS TURN UP THE HEAT

The comments have also attracted criticism from political actors and public commentators.

The NPP has accused the Chief Justice of making political commentary and called on him to resign, while political activist and physician Dr Arthur Kobina Kennedy has argued that the remarks were inappropriate for the head of an independent arm of government.

Former Auditor-General Daniel Yaw Domelevo has also urged the Chief Justice to avoid commenting on political matters that could potentially become subjects of litigation, warning that such statements could create a perception of bias.

JUDICIAL SERVICE RESPONDS

Amid the growing controversy, the Judicial Service has defended the Chief Justice’s intentions.

Judicial Secretary Musah Ahmed said the observations were made “in good faith” and were not intended to undermine judicial independence. The Service further reaffirmed the Chief Justice’s commitment to the integrity and independence of the Judiciary and to justice and equality before the law.

THE BIGGER QUESTION

At the heart of the controversy is a delicate constitutional issue: how far can the head of Ghana’s Judiciary go in publicly commenting on political and governmental performance without creating the appearance of taking sides?

While the Chief Justice’s supporters may view his comments as observations on institutional performance, critics believe the language and comparisons risk blurring the line between judicial leadership and political commentary.

With calls for restraint growing and the Judicial Service standing by the Chief Justice’s intentions, the debate over judicial independence, perception and political neutrality is far from over.