Reforming Ghana's Supreme Court: Lessons from Global Judicial Systems

The Supreme Court of Ghana holds a vital position in upholding the Constitution and safeguarding democratic principles. However, challenges relating to the size of the judiciary, financial sustainability, and the impartiality of appointments have generated robust debate. By examining international practices, Ghana has an opportunity to optimize its judiciary while ensuring judicial independence.

Ghana's Judicial Structure and Appointment Concerns

The 1992 Constitution of Ghana mandates that the Supreme Court consist of the Chief Justice and at least nine other justices. Over time, successive administrations have surpassed this minimum, with recent appointments by President Nana Akufo-Addo bringing notable figures like Justice Henry Anthony Kwofie and Justice Yaw Darko Asare, both associated with the New Patriotic Party (NPP). This trend has raised questions about transparency and meritocracy in the appointment process, which are essential for maintaining public trust.

Moreover, the financial strain posed by judicial retirement policies—where retired Supreme Court justices receive full salaries as pensions—amplifies sustainability concerns. The balance between honoring judicial service and protecting public resources requires careful reevaluation.

Global Perspectives on Judicial Composition

1. United States: The U.S. Supreme Court has maintained its nine-justice structure since 1869, serving a population of over 334 million. Its stability supports institutional balance and efficiency.

2. Canada: Canada’s Supreme Court comprises nine justices for approximately 39 million citizens, ensuring linguistic and regional representation without compromising efficiency.

3. United Kingdom: The UK Supreme Court has 12 justices, covering devolved constitutional matters while serving a population exceeding 67 million.

4. Australia: The High Court of Australia operates with seven justices, maintaining effective deliberation for 26 million citizens.

5. Singapore: Singapore adopts a flexible judicial structure, adjusting its composition to workload demands for its population of around 6 million. This model reflects adaptability and cost-efficiency.

Capping Ghana's Supreme Court Justices

Ghana's Supreme Court bench is larger than those of many countries with bigger or similar populations. This raises concerns about administrative efficiency, financial sustainability, and the risk of politicization through judicial appointments. To address this:

• Introduce a constitutional cap on the number of justices to align with workload and population.
• Streamline judicial appointments with transparent criteria, emphasizing merit and integrity.

Optimizing Appointment Procedures
Globally, judicial appointments are often shaped by independence, merit, and public accountability:

• United Kingdom: The Judicial Appointments Commission oversees candidate selection based on merit, ensuring impartiality and diversity.
• Canada: Judicial Advisory Committees assess candidates, maintaining consultative and transparent processes.
• South Africa: Public interviews conducted by the Judicial Service Commission promote transparency and public confidence.
• Singapore: The merit-based reappointment of retired judges optimizes expertise while managing workloads.

Adopting elements from these systems, Ghana could establish an independent Judicial Appointments Commission. Transparent selection processes and public engagement could help reduce political influences and boost confidence in the judiciary.

Recommendations for Reform
1. Constitutional Cap: Set a limit on the number of Supreme Court justices to ensure efficiency.

2. Merit-Based Appointments: Institutionalize clear, transparent criteria for selecting justices.

3. Retirement Policy Revision: Transition to contribution-based pensions, balancing fiscal sustainability.

4. Reemployment Models: Reappoint retired judges in advisory or part-time capacities to retain expertise while reducing pension dependency.

5. Digital Infrastructure: Leverage technology for improved case management and judicial efficiency.

6. Regular Assessments: Conduct periodic reviews of workload and adjust judicial structures accordingly.

Conclusion
Judicial reform is essential for safeguarding the integrity, efficiency, and sustainability of Ghana’s Supreme Court. By implementing lessons from global practices, Ghana can create a more transparent, efficient, and financially responsible judiciary, reinforcing public trust in its role as the guardian of justice.

Retired Senior Citizen
Teshie-Nungua
[email protected]