Recently, there was a fulminating debate about the leakage of a letter the Chief Justice of Ghana, Her
Ladyship Gertrude Torkornoo (Mrs) had written to the President of Ghana, for a number of persons to
be appointed onto the Supreme Court.
The opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) labelled the letter and its contents as ‘politically
motivated’, whilst those who support the Chief Justice suggest that it is necessary to increase the
number of Justices on the Supreme Court because of the workload.
First, we must state that it is necessary that the opposition NDC cautions itself about how it constantly
seeks to politicize any and everything that occurs in our country. It is not always the case that everything
that happens, should be viewed through political lenses. Before an accusation of partisanship is made
against the Chief Justice of the land, we believe that her intentions should be subjected to serious study
and introspection, before such an accusation would be made, if it would be made at all. The NDC, as we
speak, is seeking to have a President elected, and one of the things that that person would do, if the
opportunity arises, is appoint someone or some people onto the Supreme Court.
Secondly, we believe that the reason given for the number of justices to be appointed, is not tenable.
The principal reason assigned for increasing the number of judges of the Supreme Court, is that they
have an extremely high workload. We believe, before we increase the numbers, that we should explore
all avenues that can be deployed, before the final (and drastic) measure of increasing the numbers on
the Supreme Court.
The first option, is to review the Supreme Court rules, to add an element of permission before any
matter that is coming from the Courts below, reach the Supreme Court for consideration. Principally, we
believe that any matter that is elevated to the Supreme Court, must be a matter in which question of
law are at stake. The current system is that litigants would almost invariably appeal all cases to the
Supreme Court, betting, sometimes on luck, that the highest court would have a different view. We say
that this practice should be fine-tuned to allow only matters that has questions of law to be settled, to
proceed to the Supreme Court.
The second suggestion, is that Supreme Court judges should be given their own secretariats and suites
of offices, with their own staff. On this staff should be appointed legal clerks, who the judge can then
assign his cases to, to write opinions after internal conferencing with the judge. The judge would then
approve the final draft and publish it as his opinion, after he/she approves of it and amends it to suit
his/her views.
It should not be the case (if this is the current practice) that a Supreme Court Judge should personally
labour over every single case, including conducting his research.
We believe that the debate would be elevated to a higher standard, if we moved it beyond mere
partisanship, and tried to find realistic solutions to the concerns of the Chief Justice.
Finally, we believe that the ceiling for judges at the Supreme Court should be maintained at nine. And
that all future presidents accepts this convention, to give the court the necessary venerability.
(Editorial of the Daily Searchlight of 15 th July, 2024).
