The Ghana Bar Association (GBA) has declared that it (GBA) stands by the Judiciary of Ghana in the lawful execution of its mandate, and that it will not allow the Ghanaian Judiciary to be maligned, defamed or treated with contempt.
This declaration of commitment to and support for the Ghanaian Judiciary was made by the National President of the GBA, Mr. Frank W.K. Beecham at the Association’s Annual Bar Conference held in Tamale on September 20, 2010.
“We shall do all in our power to ensure that the Judiciary remains independent and able to fulfil its constitutional mandate to defend, protect, and uphold The Constitution, Freedom and Justice. To the Judiciary, you are our ally for the good of our country and we have indication you could prove yourself worthy of our trust and confidence…,” expressed Mr. Beecham in his key-note address to the gathering which included the Chief Justice, Mrs. Justice Georgina Theodora Wood, the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs. Betty Mould-Iddrisu, Members of Parliament, Ministers of State, Justices of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and the High Court of Ghana, Judges of the Circuit Court and Magistrates, members of the General Council of the GBA among other local and international dignitaries.
The GBA President referred to recent calls, by some people, on Mrs. Justice Georgina Wood to resign as Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana, and said while the GBA respects the right of those persons to express their opinion, it was important to advise the protagonists to respect the Constitution.
“WHILE NOT OBJECTING TO THE RIGHT OF OUR COMPATRIOTS TO CRITICIZE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OR JUDGES IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR JUDICIAL FUNCTION, THE GBA RESENTS ANY ATTEMPTS TO SUBVERT THE INTEGRITY OF THE POSITION OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OR JUDGES BY FALSE OR INAPPROPRIATE STATEMENTS OR ACTIONS,” emphasised Mr. Beecham.
The GBA President noted that any dispute that is not settled by Alternative Resolution or amicably by disputants, but finds its way to the Courts, may lead to one party losing with the other winning with certain consequential orders and costs which may not be favourable to one or the other.
He underscored that in any democratic society where there is respect for the Rule of Law and anarchy is not permitted to prevail, decisions of the courts, however unfavourable have to be compiled with or appealed against, as appropriate.
“Everyone is entitled to comment on or criticise a decision delivered by the Courts. But we do not have to accuse trial judges of corruption or of sponsored decisions or of any improper conduct, when such accusation cannot be supported by credible evidence. Nor do we have to use language that is inflammatory or likely to lead to breaches of the peace or affect judicial independence,” Mr. Beecham cautioned.
It will be recalled that the recent string of legal set-backs suffered by the government in some high-profile cases in court, have resulted in a series of attacks on and inflammatory criticisms of the Chief Justice and the Judiciary by some leading members of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) including its National Chairman, Dr. Kwabena Adjei and the party’s 10 Regional Chairmen, who alleged political bias and corruption as the basis for those decisions and rulings they (NDC leaders and members) deemed unfavourable to their cause and/or interest.
Dr. Kwabena Adjei, speaking at the party’s press confab on August 17, 2010, indicated that whilst the NDC remained committed to the Rule of Law for a Better Ghana, “we cannot help but take note of the growing perception and suspicion among various segments of our society that the Judiciary is becoming politicized and biased in dispensing justice.”
Dr. Adjei sought to buttress the “growing perception and suspicion” by claiming that “THERE ARE UNFORTUNATE RUMORS AND ALLEGATIONS MAKING THE ROUNDS THAT A LEADING NPP LAWYER HAS ON A WEEKLY BASIS BEEN HAVING MEETINGS WITH LEADING MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY FOR THE PURPOSE OF AIDING THE DEFENDANTS IN CASES AFFECTING LEADING MEMBERS OF THE NPP.”
Dr. Adjei subsequently in an interview with Citi FM, asked the Chief Justice to take steps to ‘cleanse’ the Judiciary of corruption and political bias, and warned that if the Chief Justice failed to do that, the ruling NDC shall proceed to effect the ‘house-cleaning exercise’ by itself, adding that the party (NDC) will take on anyone who would dare accuse it (NDC) of interfering in the affairs of the Judiciary.
Asked how the NDC would undertake the ‘clean-up exercise’ Dr. Adjei retorted: “THERE ARE MANY WAYS TO KILL A CAT”.
In apparent support of the position of their National Chairman, 10 Regional Chairmen of the NDC, on August 24, 2010, called for “THE EXERCISE OF POPULAR OVERSIGHT” IN THE ADMINISTRATION AND DISPENSATION OF JUSTICE IN THE COUNTRY.
They accused the Chief Justice of personally performing a task which they believed was hitherto, the preserve of the registrars of the various courts; relative to “the very necessary but highly sensitive task of case assignment in our courts”.
“We happen to know that in several other jurisdictions they now use a blind lottery system to select which judge would preside over which case, to prevent the manipulation of the outcome of litigation. In Ghana, our Chief Justice, we are told, uses a special group perceived to be her favourites in the system to perform this sensitive task which can enable her predict the outcome of cases in which she has an interest,” alleged the 10 NDC Regional Chairmen in their press statement.
They even recalled “the proceedings of the MV Benjamin cocaine loss probe over which Mrs. Georgina Wood presided” and posited that “She was appointed Chief Justice shortly after that inconclusive enquiry which eventually led to the acquittal of the principal suspects in the missing cocaine trial and her subsequent appointment created a perception that it was her reward for doing a favourable job for President Kufuor and the drug barons who exercised so much influence in the NPP administration…,”
Taking all these into consideration and while conceding that justice emanates from the people, the GBA President made it clear that the Constitution provides that justice shall be administered in the name of the Republic, by the Judiciary which shall be independent and subject only to the Constitution.
“THE JUDICIAL POWER OF GHANA IS VESTED IN THE JUDICIARY AND NO OTHER INSTITUTION OR ORGAN OF STATE HAS BEEN GIVEN FINAL JUDICIARY POWER,” emphasized Mr. Beecham.
He conceded that there was bound to be disappointment by a losing party with a decision of the court on one hand, and jubilation, of some degree with that decision on the part of the winning party on the other hand.
“Indeed, the lawyers in the case, whether they be the Attorney-General, the President of the Bar or the latest member of the legal profession, may also be disappointed with the loss of a case or rejoice in its success. The losing or successful party may be the Government (including the Judiciary itself), or an organisation or an individual. Whatever the results, favourable or otherwise, let us all accept them in good faith and resort to the process of appeal, where it is available,” he entreated.
Mr. Beecham contended that it was, of course, necessary that the public have confidence in their judicial system, adding that a corrupt or inefficient Judiciary will certainly not enjoy the confidence of the people. He noted that the public perception of corruption within the Judiciary has been the subject of concern by the Judicial Service, which through various advisory bodies, including the Judicial Council and the General Legal Council, has taken and is taking meaningful steps to address the problem.
“But it must be said that the Judiciary of Ghana is quite efficient and performs its functions appropriately. A few high profile or sensational cases are often blown out of proportion and unsupported accusations often made to justify the loss or success of the cases. There are mechanisms in existence for correction of mistakes and through the appellate process. It is recognized that judges as humans can also make mistakes and hence the availability of the Appeal System for the correction of these mistakes,” stressed Mr. Beecham.
He thus reminded the citizenry that if anyone has or obtains credible evidence of bias or corruption militating against the proper function of the Judiciary, mechanisms exist for dealing with such situations.
“The Judicial Service has a Complaints Unit for the receipt and processing of complaints against Judges, Staff of the Judicial Service or even lawyers, not to mention that the Ghana Bar Association which also has a Disciplinary Committee, alluded to earlier in this address. The General Legal Council of Ghana also has a Disciplinary Committee dealing with complaints against lawyers, while the Judicial Council comprising lawyers, judges, chiefs, Security Services and nominees of the Executive, also has a Disciplinary Committee to deal with all complaints against judges or other judicial officers. All these bodies have been actually dealing with such matters and the Judicial Council, in particular, has been satisfied with the actions taken against offending officials. In any event, without waiting for the decision of the judges alleged to be corrupt or biased, legal processes exist which can always be resorted to in order to get the case transferred from one judge to another,” he elaborated.
He emphasised that it was the view of the GBA that having regard to the circumstances outlined above, THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE FOR A LOSING PARTY OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE TO RESORT TO THE AIRWAVES TO MAKE UNWARRANTED ACCUSATIONS AGAINST A TRIAL JUDGE. “LET US ALLOW THE INSTITUTIONS OF OUR CONSTITUTION TO WORK THINGS OUT FOR US,” he advised.
He added: “All I am calling for is a rational analysis of all the facts. By all means let us examine the conduct of all parties involved in the conduct of the case and the decision arising therefrom and where that Judge has been found to be in breach of his judicial oath, the due process may be invoked to deal with that Judge.”
Mr. Beecham reminded judges that should any of them (judges) fail the test of integrity and indulge in actions which undermine their judicial oath of office, “YOU CAN BE SURE THE GBA WOULD ACTUALLY SPEARHEAD THE MOVE TO BRING ANY DEVIANT JUDGE TO BOOK.”
The GBA President also considered it noteworthy to commend President J.E.A Mills, who, he described as “a member of good standing in the GBA”, “for his statesmanship in matters affecting the Judiciary, so far.”
Stay tuned for the publication of the full text of the Address delivered by the GBA President at the General Annual Bar Conference held in Tamale on September 20, 2010.
