A private legal practitioner, Kofi Bekai, has cautioned the Ghanaian public, particularly politicians, to exercise restraint in their criticism of the courts.
Mr Bekai emphasised that while the courts are open to scrutiny, scandalising them amounts to contempt and undermines the rule of law.
His comments come in reaction to the public commentary made by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin regarding the orders issued by the Tamale High Court in the case concerning the Kpandai constituency election.
The High Court had ordered a rerun of the entire constituency election on the grounds of established irregularities.
The governing New Patriotic Party (NPP) expressed strong disagreement with the ruling, arguing that the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) had only sought reliefs concerning 41 polling stations out of the total 152 in the constituency.
At a subsequent press conference, Mr Afenyo-Markin controversially stated that the presiding judge had acted in favour of his “paymasters”.
On Judicial Disagreement and Appeals
Responding to the Minority Leader’s remarks, Mr Bekai refrained from labelling the commentary as definitively right or wrong.
He strongly advised that individuals who disagree with court judgements should pursue legitimate legal steps, such as filing appeals, instead of resorting to casting aspersions on the judiciary.
Mr Bekai also warned politicians against interfering with the work of the judiciary, stating that political power is transient. He suggested that actions taken to undermine independent institutions now could eventually come back to negatively affect them when the political dynamics shift.
“I will neither say the commentary by the Minority Leader was wrong nor right. However, we have to be decorous and professional in our language when criticising the court. Your language about the court should be serene. While his commentary was political, we must strive for serenity in our language. If you disagree with the judgement, file an appeal. As a lawyer, you will go back before the judge and may be confronted with these remarks. Therefore, you should be decent in your commentary about the court.
We do not scandalise the courts. We should be guided by our commentary. Not only lawyers, but all individuals must respect the courts. The power you wield, which you use in discharging your duties, is the same power that another would use when they are also in charge.”
Additionally, the legal practitioner stated that if it is factually established that the judge exceeded the scope of the reliefs specifically sought by the NDC, this would constitute a valid ground for appeal.
He, however, acknowledged a potential counter-argument: if the NPP had informed the court of other irregularities beyond the 41 polling stations presented by the NDC, then the judge may have acted within the law by granting the order for the entire polls to be conducted again.
By: Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana