President John Dramani Mahama‘s nomination of seven judges to the Supreme Court warms the hearts of many, as it includes some notable judges who have been sidelined for years because they don’t appear politically aligned.

Those who read my book, “The President Ghana Never Got,” would have seen one such name in the chapter that reveals how Akufo-Addo appointed a judge to the Supreme Court to appease a retiring judge.

In exercising his power to appoint judges, President Akufo-Addo ignored Court of Appeal judges such as the erudite Justice Dennis Dominic Adjei, who has been at the Court of Appeal since 2010.

Aside from being one of the foremost judicial scholars in Ghana, with six leading law textbooks and co-author of a seventh, Sir Dennis—as his students and lawyers refer to him, for he was knighted by Pope Benedict XVI in 2005—has distinguished himself internationally. He was elected a judge of the African Court of Justice in July 2022 for a term of six years. He is also part of the nine-member advisory committee of the International Criminal Court. A fellow of the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences, Justice Dennis Dominic Adjei was elected as the Inns of Court and Advanced Legal Institute of the University of London Senior Judges Fellow for Common Law Jurisdictions for the 2022-2023 academic year.

While judges like Sir Dennis were marking time at the Court of Appeal, Akufo-Addo appointed an NPP parliamentary candidate in the 2016 election to the high court and, within two years, elevated him to the Supreme Court.

In my book cited above, I reveal that this appointment was made to appease a retiring Supreme Court judge whom Akufo-Addo had disappointed, first with the position of the Chief Justice. The President later deserted the judge after asking him to get ready as the Speaker of Parliament nominee in Akufo-Addo’s second term.

With this knowledge, the appointment of judges such as Sir Dennis seems to correct an obvious error. So, I don’t have an issue with the seven names nominated to join the Supreme Court. There are some I do not know and cannot pass judgment on their suitability or otherwise.

However, considering the political discussions that have taken place in recent times, the politics and optics do not look very tidy.

On the substance of it, some have argued that the number of judges at the Supreme Court is too high. I leave that to the legal experts to educate us, because my lay person’s view is biased towards prompt dispensing of justice, which could hinge on the number of judges present to sit on cases.

The numbers alone may not constitute political packing of the court because the suspended Chief Justice wanted to add judges to the Supreme Court, an action many criticised because the procedure she used was flawed. But some political utterances and the contentious timing of the nominations leave one scratching one’s head, even if the seven judges are not an issue.

For now, one can only hope that the men and women who occupy the most hallowed benches of our land will serve with integrity, dispensing justice according to the dictates of the law and good conscience.

Until we are told to get guns, machetes, and cudgels to defend ourselves when offended, we will all submit to the courts for justice. But if a people can no longer look to the courts for justice, they resort to alternatives, which even the political class may not survive.

Let our judges serve the people, for the president who appoints them was an ordinary human being until the people gave him their power. Less than a year ago, that powerful man who could dismiss the petition against the Chief Justice without having to explain to anybody can, today, not appoint a cleaner to the district magistrate court.

Why?

He no longer wields the people’s power.