The Ghana Catholic Bishops’ Conference has rejected calls for the resignation of Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie over remarks he made during visits to the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) and the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF).

The Conference said the calls were disproportionate, although it acknowledged that some of the Chief Justice’s comments could create concerns about the appearance of judicial impartiality.

In a statement on Sunday, September 6, the Bishops said there was nothing improper about the Chief Justice visiting public institutions, assessing their operations or commending improvements.

It said the concern was with the political character that some of his remarks, particularly his reference to the “past eight years”, could reasonably be understood to have acquired.

“In our national context, such a phrase is readily heard as a comparison between the present administration and its predecessor,” the Conference said.

It added that what may have started as a straightforward assessment of institutional performance “thus took on, at least in appearance, the character of a partisan judgment.”

The Bishops noted that the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development had also raised concerns that the remarks could create an impression of political endorsement and weaken confidence in judicial impartiality.

However, the Conference said it had taken note of the Judicial Service’s clarification that the Chief Justice’s observations were made in good faith and without any intention to compromise judicial independence.

It said the Judicial Service had also reaffirmed his commitment to the integrity of the Judiciary and equality before the law.

“We receive that clarification in good faith,” the Bishops said.

The Conference nevertheless stressed that the episode raises important questions about judicial ethics and public trust.

It said the Chief Justice was not an ordinary public commentator, given that courts could be called upon to determine disputes involving the government, political parties and public institutions.

“Judicial independence is not only a matter of actual impartiality; it also depends on the visible, unmistakable appearance of impartiality,” the statement said.

The Bishops, however, were clear that the controversy did not amount to evidence that the Chief Justice was partisan or that the Judiciary had been compromised.

“Such conclusions would go well beyond the evidence available to us, and calls for his resignation on this basis alone strike us as disproportionate to the offence,” they said.

The Conference said the Chief Justice, like any citizen, was entitled to his own convictions. But it stressed that his public conduct should not create reasonable doubt about his position.

It suggested that the Chief Justice could have commended the achievements of SSNIT and MIIF on their own merits without comparing the records of one administration with another.

The Bishops also appealed to both the governing party and opposition to exercise restraint.

“The governing party ought not to treat criticism of the Chief Justice as an attack on its own record, nor should the opposition treat his remarks as proof that the courts have been captured,” the statement said.

The Conference urged all public office holders to uphold the same standard of restraint, regardless of which party is in government.