Did the Appeal Court Err in overturning the Dismissal of Judge Alfred K Asiedu?

I was shocked beyond belief on Wednesday, April 1, 2026, when I read on Ghanaweb that the Court of Appeal by a 2-1 decision has overturned the dismissal of a Circuit Court Judge, Alfred Kwabena Asiedu (see, “Court of Appeal overturns dismiss of Circuit Judge.”, Ghanaweb, April 1, 2026). I was shocked for a number of reasons, which are the subject of this article.

First, I remember the case vividly as I read the reasons for the dismissal reported by the Ghanaian media in 2023. In fact, the reasons without doubt, showed the judge was not fit to be a judge due to breach of his judicial oath by having a relationship with a woman involved in a in divorce case that the judge was handling. Again, when his relationship with the woman turned sour, the judge abused his position by ordering the arrest of the woman and falsely prosecuted her (see, “Chief Justice dismisses judge for improper relationship with woman in divorce case.”, Daily Graphic, December 5, 2023 and “Chief Justice dismisses judge for having affair with petitioner in a divorce case, causing her arrest.”, Ghanaweb, also December 5, 2023).

How did the Court of Appeal overturn his dismissal on appeal after the judge in question failed at the High Court to overturn his dismissal considering the facts of the case and today’s “Me Too Movement”? This judgement appears to be one law for the rich and powerful and another for the weak and poor.

Let me now turn to the reasons given by the majority for overturning the dismissal. According to the report on Ghanaweb, the court held that “the Judicial Council lacked the authority to investigate the allegations of malicious prosecution against a judge.” The majority further ruled that, “the Committee’s findings of abuse of power were invalid” because “that charge was intrinsically linked to the malicious prosecution allegation, which was itself beyond the Committee’s jurisdiction.” Really?

From the letter of dismissal by the then Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo as reported in the Daily Graphic of December 5, 2023, the dismissal was guided by Articles 151(1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution, which is under “Appointment, Retirement and Removal of Judicial Officers.” For easy reference, I quote them as follows:

151(1) “A person holding a judicial office may be removed from office by the Chief Justice on grounds only of stated misbehaviour, incompetence or inability to perform his functions arising from infirmity of body or mind and upon a resolution supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of the Judicial Council.”

151(2) “For the purpose of clause (1) of this article, the judicial officer shall be entitled to be heard in his defence by himself or by a lawyer or other expert of his choice.”

Now can the majority justices tell Ghanaians, which part of Article 151(1) and (2) was breached by either the Chief Justice, the Disciplinary Committee or the Judicial Council? Did Judge Alfred Kwabena Asiedu deny before the Disciplinary Committee that he had inappropriate sexual relationship with a woman in a divorce case before him? Did he deny that he did not cause the arrest and prosecution of the same woman when the relationship went sour?

Are the above not grounds for dismissal of a judicial officer because they constitute breach of judicial oath to be impartial and how could he be impartial to the husband of the woman when as a judge on the divorce case, he was sleeping with the woman? Is that also not breach of the tenets judicial or professional ethnics of judges and lawyers of Ghana Bar Association? Moreover, did causing the arrest of the woman and prosecuting her not abuse of position, authority or power? Finally, did the behaviour of the judge not bring the judiciary into disrepute?

Let me remind the two majority justices of what Lord Chief Justice of England, Lord Hewart said on the delivery of justice in the case of (Rex v Sussex Justices [1924] 1 KB 256) in November 1923. “It is not only merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”

Regrettably, by the facts of case, justice has not been done, let alone be manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to have been done. Some people will question why I have quoted from and provided examples from England and not Ghana or Africa. First, Ghana’s jurisprudence is similar to or from England, the US and the Commonwealth. Second, Ghana is striving to have a judicial system as fair and transparent as England. In any fair jurisdiction such as England, Judge Alfred Kwabena Asiedu would have been sacked and not allowed to appeal as soon as investigations established that he had a sexual relationship with a woman in a divorce case before him as a judge. The unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution of the same woman by Juge Asiedu would have resulted in a civil suit against the police and Judge Asiedu because his actions were irrational and unreasonable of a judge to the extent that no reasonable person would have behaved the way he did.

In March 2015, three judges in England were dismissed and one resigned after investigation by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) established that the judges used their work computers to view non-illegal pornographic materials whilst at work. Their actions were considered as "inexcusable misuse" of judicial IT accounts and "wholly unacceptable." (see, “Three judges removed and a fourth resigns for viewing pornography at work.”, The Guardian, March 15, 2015). In Ghana nothing would have happened to them because they are above the law though they are the custodians of the law.

Again, the psychiatrist brother of the former United Kingdom’s Chancellor of the Exchequer (Finance Minister, George Osborne), was struck off the UK medical register for “blatant disregard of the fundamental tenets of the medical profession.” Adam Osborne, 39, admitted having a two-year sexual and emotional affair with a vulnerable patient he was treating for anxiety and depression at his private psychiatry practice in central London (see, “Chancellor’s psychiatrist brother is struck off medical register.”, British Medical Journal, 2016;352:i900, 12 February 2016). His brother was the UK’s Finance Minister from May 2010 till 16 July 2016, yet he was struck off the medical register and would be unable to practice in the UK again for disregarding fundamental tenets of the medical profession. Had this happened in Ghana, who dare struck of the brother of Ken Ofori-Attah or Dr Cassiel Ato Forson for having a sexual relationship with his client? Who born dog?

Let me analyse the reasons given by the majority justices for overturing the dismissal. We must remind ourselves that this case was an employment dispute between an employee and the employer. I am confident in analysing this matter because I have knowledge and experience in employment law and employment disputes, though in England. I worked as head of casework, represented and presented employment claims of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, discrimination, etc at Employment Tribunals as well as served as Panel Member of the London and Eastern Region Employment Tribunals that adjudicated employment disputes cases.

I assume Judge Asiedu claimed unfair dismissal and per the reasons the two justices overturned his dismissal, his unfair dismissal claim as upheld because “the Judicial Council lacked the authority to investigate the allegations of malicious prosecution against a judge” and “the Disciplinary Committee’s findings of abuse of power were invalid” because “that charge was intrinsically linked to the malicious prosecution allegation, which was itself beyond the Committee’s jurisdiction.” However, they failed to explain why they came to the two conclusions, but I suspect it will be in their written judgement.

In law and particularly, employment law regarding employment disputes, a competent court of jurisdiction having established that the processes and procedures for the dismissal was unfair, MUST NOT automatically conclude that the unfair dismissal claim should be upheld but must ask and answer the question, “in view of the facts of the case, had the processes and procedures been fair, what would have been the outcome? If the outcome would have been dismissal, then the court must remit the case back to the employer or the lower court for a rehearing by a different committee or panel”. That is what the justices failed in their duty to do in this case.

This is important because considering the behaviour of Judge Asiedu, no reasonable person would have come to the conclusion that the dismissal should be overturned, and Judge Asiedu reinstated. Therefore, this decision by the Court of Appeal is not only wrong but it also brings the judiciary into disrepute and must not be allowed to stand.

It’s also worth noting that that from the reasons given by the Court Appeal, it strangely reviewed the work and decisions of the Disciplinary Committee and the Judicial Council, instead of the law as applied by the High Court Judge to reach the decision to reject Judge Asiedu’s appeal against his dismissal. An appellate court should not review the work of the original hearing panel but that of the immediate lower court because doing so is rehearing the case already hear by the Disciplinary Committee and decided by the Judicial Council, which had been reviewed by the High Court. This is wrong and unacceptable.

The judgement appears to be nothing but either judges defending one of their own or an attempt to reverse decisions made by the former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo. IT will be interesting to find out when Judge Asiedu took his case to the Appeal Court. Was it after Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo was suspended/dismissed or prior to. I hope that will come out in the full written judgement.

This is not justice and must be challenged at the Supreme Court.

Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK.

By Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK