“HE HAS DRAGGED THE JUDICIARY INTO POLITICS” — DR ZAATO SLAMS BAFFOE-BONNIE’S SOE COMMENTS

Political scientist says Chief Justice’s remarks on SSNIT, MIIF could damage public confidence in judicial independence

The controversy surrounding Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie’s comments on the performance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) has taken another dramatic turn, with University of Ghana political scientist Dr Joshua Ebuntie Zaato warning that the remarks could undermine the independence and credibility of the Judiciary.

Dr Zaato, a Senior Lecturer at the University of Ghana’s Department of Political Science, argued that the Chief Justice must be particularly cautious about entering areas that could be interpreted as political commentary.

According to him, the Judiciary occupies a unique constitutional position and must remain sufficiently removed from political contestation to preserve public confidence.

“THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO CANNIBALISE THE JUDICIARY”

Speaking on The Big Issue on Channel One TV, Dr Zaato launched a strong defence of the separation of powers, insisting that citizens depend on the Judiciary as a protection against abuse and tyranny.

He argued that the Chief Justice’s comments risk pulling the judicial arm of government into the political arena.

Dr Zaato described the situation as an attempt to “cannibalise” the Judiciary by drawing it closer to the Executive and political discourse.

His concern is that once the head of the Judiciary is perceived as taking positions on the performance of governments or state institutions, questions about judicial neutrality could inevitably arise.

WHY IS THE CHIEF JUSTICE TALKING ABOUT GOVERNMENT’S RECORD?

Dr Zaato questioned why the Chief Justice would comment on the performance of state institutions when government already has officials responsible for defending its record.

He pointed specifically to the government’s communication machinery, arguing that there was no need for the Chief Justice to become an apparent defender of the performance of state institutions.

For him, the issue goes beyond whether the Chief Justice’s observations were factually correct.

The bigger concern, he suggested, is how such comments are perceived by the public and whether they could weaken confidence in the Judiciary as an independent arm of government.

“WHY ONLY THE LAST EIGHT YEARS?”

Dr Zaato also took issue with the apparent focus on the performance of SOEs over the previous eight years.

He questioned why an assessment of institutions such as SSNIT should be limited to the period of the Akufo-Addo administration rather than examining the institution’s performance across a much longer period.

He argued that comparing an eight-year period with only two years of the current administration could create an impression of political selectivity.

“If you’re trying to use eight years and two years, it’s wrong,” he argued.

NPP ALREADY DEMANDS RETRACTION

The latest criticism comes after the New Patriotic Party (NPP) also attacked the Chief Justice’s comments, describing them as political and calling on him either to retract the remarks and apologise or resign.

The controversy followed the Chief Justice’s recent outreach engagements with state institutions, including SSNIT and the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF).

During the engagements, Baffoe-Bonnie commented on the performance of the institutions and referred to improvements he said had been recorded.

JUDICIAL SERVICE FIRES BACK

But the Judicial Service has rejected suggestions that the Chief Justice intended to compromise judicial independence.

In a statement issued by Judicial Secretary Musah Ahmed, the Service said the observations were made in good faith and were not intended to serve any purpose inimical to judicial independence.

The statement further reaffirmed the Chief Justice’s commitment to protecting the integrity and independence of the Judiciary and promoting justice and equality before the law.

THE BIG QUESTION

The unfolding controversy has now placed Chief Justice Baffoe-Bonnie at the centre of an increasingly heated national debate over where judicial commentary should end and political commentary should begin.

While the Judicial Service insists the remarks were made in good faith, critics such as Dr Zaato believe the perception created by the comments could be damaging enough to warrant serious concern.

And with political actors already weighing in, the debate is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

For Dr Zaato, the warning is blunt: the Judiciary must guard its independence fiercely — because once public confidence begins to erode, rebuilding it could be far more difficult.