A number of legal luminaries have rejected the call from some quarters that there should be a constitutional ceiling on the number of judges appointed to the supreme court of adjudicature. The IEA auditorium was virtually turned into a court room where those without a legal background could only sit and observe proceedings as the professors and doctors of law put it to each other over whether there should be a ceiling to the number of supreme court judges. Whilst, Justice Emile Short of CHRAJ and Prof. Mike Oquaye, Second Deputy Speaker of Parliament agreed with the main speaker, Prof. A. Kodzo Paaku Kludze, a former Supreme Court Judge, that there should be no ceiling, Mr. Sam Okudzeto, a constitutional lawyer and a former member of the Judicial Council thought otherwise. The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) organized the forum as part of the discussions on the ongoing constitutional review process and Prof. Kludze was emphatic that there was no need to change article 128(1) of the constitution which says "the Supreme Court shall consist of the Chief Justice and not less than nine other Justices of the Supreme Court." His view, plainly stated, was that a dictatorial president would not need to pack the Supreme Court to get his way. Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, he observed, sacked the three judges who made a ruling against him. "Did he pack the court?" he asked. Nkrumah indeed passed a law in 1964 to quash the ruling by the three judges. Again, he noted, Pervez Musharraf, former president of Pakistan resorted to similar tactics against judges who made a ruling against his government. In any case, the Prof. argued, if any president in 'today's democratic Ghana succeeds in arbitrarily increasing the number of supreme court judges to serve his purpose, it should be an "indictment" not on the president but the Judicial Council, whose advice the constitution makes mandatory for the president to seek before making such appointments, and the parliament of Ghana, whose duty it is to scrutinize appointees and approve them. Prof. Kl udze noted further that his concern was not so much with the packing of the court but whether judges would be true to their "oath" and be ready to defend the rule of law. "I am not convinced that many judges will sacrifice their principles in order to satisfy the whims of a dictator… The Supreme Court has a lot more to do than simply pandering to the whims of the government of the day." Mr. Sam Okudzeto, on the other hand, felt it was imperative the Supreme Court had a fixed number of judges since leaving it open gives the impression that somebody wants to manipulate the system. In his view, the Judicial Council was not a "fool proof' institution since "we are all human beings and are prone to mistakes." Mr. Okudze further argued that the number of Supreme Court judges did not necessarily have to increase as a country's population increases. If the United States, with a population of about 300 million, he argued, has only nine Supreme Court Judges, why should Ghana with only a population of around 24 million be too eager to increase its own. He said the workload on Ghana's Supreme Court tends to be huge because of the "weak" nature of the Appeals Court. "If you have a very strong Appeals Court, very few cases will go to the Supreme Court." What Mr. Okudzeto agreed to, though, was the "trivial" manner in which parliament handles presidential nominees including nominees for the Supreme Court. "Often I doubt if the members of parliament appreciate the power that has been reposed in them.” Reacting to the concerns about parliament, Nana Akomea who did not want to "defend" his own, pleaded though that the critics should wait till a time when the ruling party did not have majority in parliament to see if its nominees would go through as easily. The argument about the tendency of the executive arm of government to pack the Supreme Court in order to have its way has been around for some time. It came to a head when in 2002; the late Justice kwame Afreh was added to the Supreme Court judges to overturn the decision that the Fast Track High Court was illegal. Due to the rancorous nature of the relationship that exists between the two main political parties in the country - the NDC and the NPP - some have argued on the issue of the constitution of the Supreme Court based on their affiliation. But Mr. Okudzeto argued that this should not be a partisan matter at all, adding that it was sad that almost every issue was seen through partisan lens in this country. Source: Public Agenda