Trust on trial: When the courts defy common sense

Ghanaians are used to strange court decisions, but what is unfolding lately should worry anyone who believes in justice.

Yes, courts can revisit their own rulings. That is normal. But the law is clear on how it must be done. Appeals. Reviews. Proper procedures. Transparency. Not shortcuts taken in the shadows.

So how do we explain a situation where a judge delivers a ruling in open court, listens to arguments and counter-arguments, dismisses the court, then suddenly recalls a lawyer without the plaintiff present and changes the ruling shortly after? That is not clarification. That is not a correction. That is a red flag.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly stressed the principle of finality in judgments. Once a court has ruled, it becomes functus officio. Its job is done, unless specific legal steps are followed. And even then, natural justice and fairness must be protected at all costs.

In this case, they were not.
Which bank in Ghana will allow anyone to walk in and withdraw GH¢2 million cash within one hour? Even big corporations struggle with that. Yet a judge found it reasonable to order an individual to deposit GH¢2 million in cash with the court registry within one hour.

Reasonable? Sensible? Grounded in reality? Absolutely not.

And it gets worse.
On what basis did the judge conclude that Abusuapanyin Kofi Owusu Tupac had already spent as much as GH¢2 million preparing for Lumba’s funeral? Where did that figure come from?

This is the same Abusuapanyin who could not personally pay for two rams. The same man accused of living large in Accra hotels, frolicking with hook-uppers while allegedly dipping into the Lumba Foundation account. Suddenly, we are to believe he magically raised and spent GH¢2 million on funeral preparations?

Ghanaians are not fools.
When court orders defy logic, common sense and lived reality, people naturally start asking uncomfortable questions. Was this justice, or was something else at play? Was the law followed, or was fairness sacrificed?

This decision has not just embarrassed the judge involved. It has dragged the judiciary's image through the mud. If judges are seen as unreasonable, detached from reality, or worse, compromised, public trust collapses.

This judge may sleep well tonight. His bread is clearly buttered. His cup appears full. His Christmas tree may have been planted earlier than expected. But history is unkind to those who trade justice for comfort.

Because when all courts are done, there is still one judgment that no influence can bend.

And it awaits us all.