SUPREME COURT NOMINATION STALLS AS PARLIAMENT HALTS JUDGE’S VETTING OVER MISCONDUCT PETITION

SUPREME COURT NOMINATION STALLS AS PARLIAMENT HALTS JUDGE’S VETTING OVER MISCONDUCT PETITION

Ghana’s judicial appointment process was thrown into uncertainty on Wednesday this week as Parliament’s Appointments Committee indefinitely postponed the vetting of Court of Appeal Justice Kweku T. Ackaah-Boafo, following a petition alleging misconduct and judicial bias.

The petition, filed by self-proclaimed international human rights activist Anthony Kwabenya Rau, accuses the judge of culturally insensitive remarks, personal insults, and partiality in previous court proceedings. Parliament has since referred the matter to Speaker Alban Bagbin for further action, in accordance with Standing Orders that require such petitions to be investigated within 30 days.

Explosive Allegations Prompt Postponement

Justice Ackaah-Boafo was scheduled to appear before the Appointments Committee today for questioning as part of his nomination to the Supreme Court. However, the hearing was suspended after the committee received what insiders describe as a “controversial and poorly written” petition making serious allegations against the judge.

Rau alleges that the judge insulted him during proceedings at the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) court, referring to him as a “so-called ‘Messiah’ international Human Rights Activist” and questioning his legal credentials. The petition further accuses the judge of “arrogance,” “supporting corruption,” and being “power drunk.”

Rau also raised concerns about the judge’s cultural orientation, citing his Canadian background and accusing him of disrespecting Ghanaian traditions and elders. According to the petition, the judge showed him gross disrespect despite his age of 67, and omitted interest payments in a case involving the New Patriotic Party (NPP), shortly before receiving a promotion.

Constitutional and Parliamentary Procedures Triggered

Under Ghana’s Constitution, judges of the Superior Courts can only be removed for “stated misbehaviour or incompetence,” and any such process requires the President to refer a petition to the Chief Justice for a prima facie determination. It remains unclear whether Mr Rau has filed such a petition separately with the Presidency.

In Parliament, Order 99 of the Standing Orders mandates that all petitions must be presented through a Member of Parliament, signed, and clearly outline the subject matter. Once accepted, petitions are referred to the Committee on Petitions or another relevant body, which has 30 days to investigate and determine their merit.

The Appointments Committee’s decision to suspend vetting signals the seriousness with which the allegations are being treated, though no formal inquiry has yet commenced.

Judge’s Camp: Petition Is “Bogus and Baseless”

Sources close to Justice Ackaah-Boafo have fiercely rejected the claims, branding the petition as “bogus, incompetent, and unfounded.” Though the judge has not publicly commented, insiders say he remains “disappointed” by the postponement but is ready to defend his record before Parliament.

“He’s in high spirits and welcomes the opportunity to clear the air when the time is right,” a source familiar with the judge’s camp told Hard Law Journal.

Legal Community and Students Defend Judge’s Character

The petition stands in sharp contrast to recent testimonials about Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s integrity. Benjamin Alpha Aidoo, a Ghana School of Law student, recently described the judge—who teaches legal ethics—as a “gentleman” who champions integrity and civility.

In a written tribute, Aidoo praised the judge’s teaching style and values, writing: “By his words, his warmth and his gestures, it is clear that he’s such a gentleman.” He emphasized the judge’s insistence on integrity, adding that Justice Ackaah-Boafo views the nobility of legal practice as grounded in candour and respect.

The student also cited the judge’s strong stance against unprofessional conduct, referencing a recent ruling in which he condemned a lawyer’s disrespectful behaviour toward a colleague.

Speaker’s Office to Determine Next Steps

Parliamentary officials, speaking anonymously, confirmed that Speaker Bagbin is now in receipt of the petition and will decide whether the matter should be escalated to the Committee on Petitions. The Speaker’s ruling will determine whether the vetting process resumes, is delayed further, or is abandoned altogether.

While the Speaker’s office has yet to issue a statement, the development marks a rare instance where a petition has directly halted the vetting of a Supreme Court nominee.

Implications for Judicial Appointments

The incident has reignited debate around judicial independence, transparency, and the role of public input in top-level judicial appointments. Civil society groups have long called for more rigorous scrutiny of judicial nominees, though critics warn that frivolous petitions could undermine the process.

With the Speaker yet to pronounce on the matter, Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s path to the Supreme Court remains uncertain. As the process unfolds, observers will be watching closely to see how Ghana balances accountability with judicial dignity in this high-stakes appointment.