A legal practitioner, Yaw Oppong, says the determination of guilt or otherwise of judges cited for misconduct in an exposé by journalist, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, must not be based on perceived public interest in the matter.

Mr. Oppong believes although public interest in the judicial scandal is understandable, the precedent that would be set by the courts in adjudicating suits against the implicated judges and counter-suits by some of the judges themselves must be based purely on law.

He is confident the law will be allowed to lead in the matter.

“Judges do not prosecute cases based on an assumed sensitivity of the public or the nature of the person appearing before them”, he explained.

He said if any judge were to do that, they would not only be violating the oath they took to administer justice without fear, favour, ill-will or affection, but they would also be bruising their conscience.

Mr Yaw Oppong was speaking Tuesday on Joy News’ current affairs programme pm: Express on MultiTV.

Mr Oppong told show host, Nana Ansah Kwao IV, that the judges must not take into consideration “the national interest of the case to override what [they] understand the law to be.”

Tuesday’s evening programme focused on the recent outcome of an ongoing investigation into the judicial scandal that rocked the nation last month.

Two high court judges – Justice Paul Dery and Justice Mustapha Habib Logoh – implicated in the case have sued Anas and his Tiger Eye PI team at the High Court for breach of privacy among others.

In a separate suit, Justice Dery is also asking the Supreme Court to declare a petition by Anas for his removal null and void on grounds that the evidence against him has been made public in violation of Article 146(8) of the constitution.

He also says the Judicial Council, headed by Chief Justice Georgina Wood, erred in making public through a letter that he (Justice Dery) was being investigated for bribery.

There has a public outcry that the judges implicated in the bribery scandal are enjoying too much latitude. This is despite the fact that seven of some 12 high court judges have been suspended by President John Mahama.

Mr Oppong said what appears to be a slow process in removing the implicated judges is actually a function of the Constitution.

According to him, past events in Ghana’s political landscape caused drafters of the current constitution to make it difficult for say the Executive to easily remove a judge.

“If we lose the background then we will think ‘why are judges being treated differently?’ If we think that that is not appropriate let’s change the law”, he said.

He said drafters of the constitution intentionally made the removal of a judge difficult, even in instances where the judge is deemed to have misconducted himself.

The essence, he explained is to protect the judiciary. “It is a very important organ of state”, he adds.