A profound and potentially dangerous shift is occurring within Ghana’s legal community, one that threatens to erode the very foundations of judicial independence and public trust in our democratic institutions. At the heart of this turmoil is the move by a group of lawyers, perceived to be aligned with the National Democratic Congress (NDC), to formally break away from the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) and establish a new body: the Ghana Law Society (GLS).
This is not merely a matter of professional regrouping; it is a development steeped in political intrigue, with implications that reach directly into the hallowed halls of the judiciary.
Is it a Political Rhetoric to Institutional Schism?
The seeds of this division were sown in the heated aftermath of the 2020 election petition. Then-candidate John Mahama’s call to reset the judiciary when he met with lawyers that aligned with the NDC and his controversial description of the Supreme Court bench as “unanimous 7” signalled a deep-seated grievance from the NDC. This rhetoric has since crystallised into a more concrete action which led to the formation of the Ghana Law Society.
The Ghana Law Society recently intensified its efforts following the NDC’s electoral victory. The group paid a courtesy call on the Acting Chief Justice, Justice Paul Baffoe Bonnie after he was subsequently appointed as the substantive Chief Justice pending the approval of parliament. They notified the Acting Chief Justice about their intention to be recognised as an umbrella group apart from the Ghana Bar Association. It is the alleged response of the Chief Justice that has set off alarm bells across the political and legal spectrum. He directed the group to formalise its case before the General Legal Council (GLC), the regulatory body for lawyers, which he himself chairs.
This directive, while procedurally plausible, has raised critical questions about impartiality. Why should a Chief Justice, whose appointment is now pending approval by an NDC-dominated Parliament, be seen to be facilitating a process that could legitimise a group widely seen as pro-NDC? For many observers, this creates a troubling perception of a judiciary aligning itself with the executive, a blurring of lines that democracies guard against at all costs.
The Supreme Court Writ, Is it a Legal Battle for Legitimacy?
The situation has moved beyond mere perception into active litigation. A writ has been filed at the Supreme Court by lawyers associated with the Ghana Law Society, including notable figures like Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor the member of parliament for South Dayi and Majority Chief Whip. The suit, masterminded by Dr Jennifred Maurice Adjei, seeks a revolutionary interpretation of the law. It argues that any constitutional and statutory reference to the “Ghana Bar Association” should not be read as exclusive to the current Ghana Bar Association, but as inclusive of all lawyer associations, including the nascent Ghana Law Society.
The writ contends that the Ghana Bar Association’s monopoly is “discriminatory” and seeks an order to prevent the Ghana Bar Association from presenting itself as the sole representative body envisioned by the constitution. This legal challenge is not just a technicality; it is a direct assault on the institutional identity of the Ghana Bar Association, an umbrella that has, for decades, striven to represent the legal profession above partisan politics.
Is it a Trojan Horse Strategy?
Several schools of thought are emerging to explain this manoeuvre. One suggests a genuine desire for a separate, politically aligned association. Another, more cynical view, posits a “Trojan Horse” strategy: that NDC-affiliated lawyers plan to maintain membership in both the Ghana Bar Association and the Ghana Law Society, thereby aiming to exert influence over the entire legal fraternity from within and without.
The most concerning interpretation, however, surrounds the Chief Justice’s role. By directing the Ghana Law Society to the Ghana Law Council, critics alleged he has implicitly endorsed the split. This is particularly worrisome given the Chief Justice’s pivotal power to empanel judges to the bench at the superior courts. If the public perceives the head of the judiciary as partisan, the credibility of every judgment delivered under his tenure becomes subject to doubt.
The Fundamental Danger: Eroding the Last Resort
The greatest casualty in this unfolding drama is not a political party, but public confidence. The courts are the last resort for the ordinary citizen seeking justice. When this final arbiter is perceived as politicised, the social contract frays. If citizens believe that justice is contingent on political affiliation, the very essence of our democracy, where power belongs to the people, is undermined.
Ghana’s Fourth Republic has been a beacon of hope and stability in a turbulent region. This stability rests on strong, independent institutions. The bar and the bench are the bedrock of this institutional framework. Any attempt to politicise them is not just an internal squabble; it is an existential threat to our democratic gains. While freedom of association is fundamental, the creation of partisan silos within the legal profession is a recipe for institutional decay.
The question every Ghanaian must ask is: what happens when the people no longer believe in the courts? The establishment of the Ghana Law Society may be a footnote in legal history, or it may be the first crack in a foundation we assumed was unshakeable. The handling of this issue by the General Legal Council and the judiciary itself will provide the answer. For the sake of our democracy, one hopes they choose the path of unequivocal neutrality and institutional preservation for the work they are doing is to serve God and country.
By Adjei Worlanyo Frank, Akan Constituency Communications Officer, Oti Region
