The Family Court in Accra on Tuesday, June 2, heard arguments on an application seeking to restrict access by socialite and musician Mona Faiz Montrage, popularly known as Hajia4Reall, to the children of businessman Richard Nii Armah Quaye (RNAQ) and his estranged wife, Joana Quaye.

The application arose during proceedings in the ongoing divorce dispute between the couple, as the court considered a motion for maintenance orders pending appeal.

As part of the application, the Petitioner is seeking orders to limit the children’s interaction with Hajia4Reall and reduce the Respondent’s access periods with the children.

In support of the motion, the Petitioner submitted video evidence and relied on material relating to Hajia4Reall’s previous incarceration, arguing that her association with the children may not be in their best interests. The Petitioner also alleged that the children’s social media activities had been negatively influenced by their environment and interactions while in the Respondent’s care.

Court documents further referenced a video involving one of the couple’s children, which the Petitioner argued raised concerns about the child’s welfare and supervision. According to the documents, the issue was brought to the attention of the Respondent, who reportedly acknowledged concerns regarding the child’s conduct.

The Petitioner further contended that the Respondent’s alleged absence during periods when the children visited him resulted in them spending significant time in the company of Hajia4Reall and her child, who the Petitioner claims reside with the Respondent.

Respondent Challenges Application

Counsel for the Respondent, Nana Boakye Mensah-Bonsu, opposed the application and challenged the reliefs being sought.

He argued that the proposed orders would directly affect Hajia4Reall, who is not a party to the proceedings and has not been given the opportunity to be heard. Granting such orders in her absence, he submitted, could offend the principles of natural justice.

The Respondent also maintained that the reliefs sought were not available to the court under the circumstances and questioned the court’s jurisdiction to grant the orders after judgment had already been delivered in the matter.

However, counsel for the Petitioner, Godfred Yeboah Dame, disagreed. He argued that Order 65 Rule 23(3) and (4) of C.I. 47, together with the Matrimonial Causes Act, provide a legal basis for the court to make post-judgment orders where necessary.

Mr Dame further indicated that the Petitioner would not oppose the service of the application on Hajia4Reall or her participation in the proceedings should the court deem it necessary.

Addressing the video evidence, counsel for the Respondent said his legal team would respond to its contents after the court had reviewed the material.

Court Adjourns Proceedings

Following submissions from both parties, the court indicated that it would first review the video evidence filed in support of the application before making any further determinations.

The matter was subsequently adjourned to 26 June 2026, when the court is expected to view the video evidence, hear any additional submissions arising from it, and consider the Petitioner’s pending motion for an injunction.