By Kwame Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr., Ph.D.
Garden City, New York
June 2, 2015
E-mail: okoampaahoofe@optimum.net

Predictably, the presidential lapdog, otherwise known as the Minister of Communcations, called it "preposterous and absurd." But what is preposterous and absurd was his decision several years ago, together with Mr. Samuel Okudzeto-Ablakwa, now Deputy Education Minister, fully backed by the late President John Evans Atta-Mills, to defy a Supreme Court decision in the landmark case of Obetsebi-Lamptey v. Okudzeto-Ablakwa and Omane-Boamah.

It is almost certain that Dr. Edward Omane-Boamah and his present boss, President John Dramani Mahama, will lose this case, too. Already, Mr. Sam Okudzeto, the former President of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), has pointedly observed that those condemning the GBA lawsuit seeking to nullify President Mahama's appointments of Justices Yaw Apau and Gabriel Pwamang (pronounced "Huamang") to the Supreme Court, "do not understand that the courts are there to enhance and stabilize [the governance] system in the country" (See "Critics of GBA Suit Don't Understand Legal System - Okudzeto" Citifmonline.com / Ghanaweb.com 7/2/14).

The astute and venerable lawyer did not elaborate any further, obviously because he did not want to prejudice a case pending before the highest court of the land. There are three individual plaintiffs to the case, in addition to the institutional plaintiff of the Ghana Bar Association, namely, Nene Amegatcher, the current GBA President; Mr. Justin Amenuvor, GBA's National Secretary; and Mr. Frank Beecham, Immediate Past-President of the GBA. A critical examination of the GBA suit clearly indicates that the plaintiffs do not seek to challenge the professional competence and/or academic qualifications of Justices Apau and Pwamang to sit on the highest court of the land. Rather, it has to do with the President's flagrant breach of protocol, or the established process by which nominees are appointed to sit on the Supreme Court.

It also appears that three nominees/candidates were originally recommended to President Mahama by the Ghana Judicial Council, the branch of the judiciary constitutionally charged with professionally evaluating the performance of the country's judges and then making the necessary recommendations to any sitting president, who is obligated to appoint all nominees selected for promotion by the Judicial Council. For some capricious reasons best known to himself, as the GBA lawsuit clearly charges, President Mahama decided to cherry-pick by deciding to appoint only two of the three nominees recommended by the Judicial Council to sit on the most powerful judicial bench in the country.

The argument of the GBA plaintiffs is that if Mr. Mahama, who has absolutely no professional background in law or Ghanaian judicial protocol, can unilaterally decide that the third nominee for the Supreme Court does not merit his presidential approval, then it stands to reason that Justices Apau and Pwamang equally do not qualify to sit on the highest court of the land. As of this writing, the name of the third nominee flatly rejected by the President had not been disclosed. And that is the narratological beauty of suspense, which invariably attends some of the most sensitive cases brought before the highest court of the land. It well appears that the GBA suit hinges on a breach of well-established convention. Mr. Sam Okudzeto's argument is that it is significant and even absolutely necessary for those entrusted with ensuring that the integrity of our nation's laws is upheld and protected at all times, to raise the proverbial red-flag anytime that any person who is entrusted with great powers that are liable to be whimsically abused decides to do precisely that.

The respected former GBA President also highlights the fact that it is common place to see people in powerful positions of trust like President Mahama attempt to cavalierly ride roughshod over the civil rights of others well below the political pecking order. The annoying reality here, though, is that once people like President Mahama leave public office and begin to realize how vulnerable they are, they earnestly resort to the protective services of the very members of the Ghana Bar Association whom they are now treating with the back of their left hand; and the latter, of course, is assuming that Mr. Mahama is right-handed.

_____________________________________________________________