By Goodnuff Appiah LARBI
Within the first five months of his second term, John Dramani Mahama has elevated seven Justices of the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Ghana—a move that has drawn widespread commendation. Many observers have praised the appointments as a step toward strengthening the judiciary.
Investigative journalist Manasseh Azure Awuni, expressing his approval, remarked, “This is about the best set of Supreme Court appointments in a long time. Solid promotion from Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court.” The appointments are widely seen as a merit-based advancement that reflects a commitment to judicial excellence and institutional integrity.
However, the minority in Parliament, led by Alexander Afenyo-Markin, has expressed strong reservations about the nominations. He describes the appointments as constitutionally controversial, particularly in light of the suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo.
According to him, the Chief Justice’s suspension was affected through a procedurally flawed process under Article 146(6) of the 1992 Constitution.
In accordance with constitutional requirements, these nominees appeared before Parliament’s Appointments Committee for vetting between June 16-18, 2025.
In recent times, judicial activists have advanced persuasive arguments in favour of strengthening the Court of Appeal—a position that has garnered notable support from several nominees to the Supreme Court during their vetting.
As the court of last resort for many Ghanaians, enhancing the capacity and authority of the Court of Appeal is a laudable objective particularly as a means of reducing the caseload burden on the Supreme Court, while also minimizing delays and litigation-related costs.
Justice Philip Bright Mensah has passionately suggested that conscious efforts must be made to strengthen the Court of Appeal beyond its current state. According to His Lordship, some cases that travel to the Supreme Court can be resolved at the Court of Appeal once the existing structures have been modernized and strengthened with the necessary tools.
However, I contend that such proposals must be grounded in empirical evidence rather than theoretical assertions. To assess the practicality and efficacy of strengthening the Court of Appeal, it is imperative to conduct rigorous research into the number of appeal cases that have been overturned by the Supreme Court since the inception of the 1992 Constitution.
If statistical data and legal analysis reveal that the majority of decisions from the Court of Appeal are upheld at the Supreme Court, then it would be reasonable to consider designating the Court of Appeal as the final appellate forum in certain cases.
In that case, Article 136(2) of the Constitution could be amended to require a panel of five (5) Justices—rather than three (3)—to hear such matters, thereby enhancing the Court of Appeal’s capacity for finality. Conversely, if the data shows a significant rate of reversal by the Supreme Court, then the status quo should be maintained.
Illustrative of this issue is the case of Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta v Ghana Telecommunication Co. Ltd, Suit No. J8/37/2021, which involved the admission of fresh evidence on appeal.
The respected renowned Justice, Kulendi JSC stated at page 2 that “Following the grant of leave … to adduce … fresh evidence… This is a novel application because, in our rich line of judicial decision on the abduction of fresh evidence on appeal, it is difficult to find precedent.” This case exemplifies how matters lost at the Court of Appeal may still reach the Supreme Court, not merely for correction but to enrich Ghana’s legal jurisprudence. If the majority of cases reaching the apex court are indeed overturned, assigning finality to the Court of Appeal may result in unjust outcomes and hinder legal development.
Furthermore, under Section 16 of the Representation of the People Law, 1992 (PNDCL 284), the High Court is conferred with original jurisdiction to determine parliamentary election disputes. Per Article 99(2) of the 1992 Constitution, appeals from such matters are intended to terminate at the Court of Appeal.
Yet, in practice, these cases frequently find their way to the Supreme Court through judicial review. Notable examples include Sumaila Bielbiel v Adamu Dramani & Attorney General and Michael Ankomah Nimfah v James Gyakye Quayson.
These instances suggest that even constitutionally final appellate decisions are often revisited, raising critical questions about the real finality of litigation in Ghana’s legal system.
The oft-quoted maxim that “litigation must come to an end” must not be invoked as a mere rhetorical device; rather, it must be given meaningful application.
The path to ensuring that lies in empirical inquiry and data-driven reform. Ultimately, by anchoring our debates and proposals in factual analysis and measurable outcomes, we can make informed and effective decisions about the role, structure, and authority of the Court of Appeal.
Only then can reforms truly serve the ends of justice and the long-term integrity of Ghana’s judicial system.
In light of the identified lacuna or gap, the writer calls for empirical research to ascertain the number of cases remitted from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court, along with the outcomes of those decisions, to support the need for appropriate reforms.
>>>The writer is a BL Candidate at Ghana School of Law and has completed his PhD in Development Studies at Africa Research University, Lusaka, Zambia, and is currently awaiting graduation. He can be reached via [email protected]
