Protecting Ghana's democracy

and integrity of the Judiciary

To sustain Ghana's democratic efforts and maintain the successes achieved so far under the 1992 Constitution, it is very important for every Ghanaian who believes in the principles of democracy, particularly in good governance, to protect the integrity of the Judiciary.





Article 128 (4) of the 1992 Constitution, says, “A person shall not be qualified for appointment as a Justice of the Supreme Court unless he is of high moral character and proven integrity and is of not less than fifteen years' standing as a lawyer.”

These criteria for qualification to the highest court of the land by the Constitution puts a lot of responsibility on Ghanaians to, as much as possible, abstain from using derogatory re-marks and indecent language that would undermine the integrity of the Justices of Su-preme Court.





In spite of Article 128 (4) of the Constitution, the Justices of the Supreme Court sitting on the on-going 2012 election petition have somehow come under serious negative criticisms by the public. Though, some of these criticisms emanated from peoples' perceptions and opinions – they have negative effects on the integrity of the Judiciary, especially now that the Ghanaian society is so polarized along partisan political lines.





Article 21 (1) ( a) of the Constitution talks about freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media for all Ghanaians to be informed through the dissemination of news and information. How-ever, it is important for the public to be circumspect with whatever they say or write, particularly those who are privileged to have access to the media.

It is important to note that there are millions of Ghanaians who are looking for such media platforms (access to media facilities) to educate, inform and entertain their compatriots with the ultimate aim to improve the socio-economic well-being of the people.





Today, what do the people of Ghana read, hear and see in the print and electronic media. The media landscape is flooded with many social and political commentators who have arrogated “untouchable” powers unto themselves in the name of freedom of speech and expressions to champion their own causes in the name of democracy, claiming to be speaking for the benefit of the larger society.


The caution, there-fore, to the unsuspecting public is that they should take note of such commentators and treat their comments and contributions with all the contempt that they deserve since views of such commentators are subjective, baseless and pregnant with hearsay.


Though it is very important without any prejudice for Ghanaians to constitutionally choose who and/or which political party should govern the nation, there are many national pressing socio-economic issues that cannot wait. They must urgently be addressed.

Many Ghanaians would have expected that the media, in setting agenda role for public dialogue, will demonstrate some balance and fairness by allocating enough space and time to national issues bothering on economic and social matters that are making news. For example, Ghana is unable to meet its basic energy needs largely as a result of inefficiency and the under-performance of the country's energy service providers.


Another important issue making the news is the 2012 Auditor-General's Report on the Ministries Department and Agencies (MDA) on which President John Dramani Mahama re-cently called for the prosecution of the indicted corrupt public officials.


In conclusion, the Justices of the Supreme Court made it clear that they are not immune from criticisms, but a cursory look at Article 21 (1) ( a) of the Constitution would suggest to a Ghanaian who desires to air his/her views with respect to the on-going election petition to a critique rather than insult the honourable men and women of the highest Bench of the country.


Constructive criticisms after the verdict of the court would be more appropriate.


Unprejudiced comments of the election petition before the Court renders it final judgement is warranted and defaulters would accordingly be summoned and charged with contempt of court.

It is also worth mentioning that some of the comments and suggestions so far made by the public are without any malice but simple feedback concerning peoples' perceptions about the election petition before the Justices of the Supreme Court. It is important for all Ghanaians, the media as well as the Judiciary to note that peoples' perceptions and opi-nions can also be used for remedial measures in protecting Ghana's democracy and the integrity of the Judiciary.


Arguably, it is important for the Judiciary to allay the fears of many Ghanaians, particularly the media, that the recent posture and/or action by the Justices of the Supreme Court with respect to the three and ten days jail sentences given to Stephen Atugiba - NDC communicator - and Ken Koranchie, Daily Searchlight editor, respectively does not in any way seek to erode the checks and balances in our democratic dispensation – the basic principles underpinning democracy in which the citizenry is at liberty to exercise their natural and inalienable rights without fear.


Author could be reached on 0249 676 074