The Dean of the University of Professional Studies, Accra (UPSA) Law School, Prof Kofi Abotsi, has warned that the credibility and future effectiveness of the ECOWAS Court of Justice will depend largely on its ability to remain independent and ensure that its decisions are respected, even when they are politically inconvenient to member states.

He said the enforcement of the Court’s orders remained one of its most difficult challenges, as member states continued to grapple with the demands of national interests and political considerations alongside their obligations to a supranational judicial institution.

Prof Abotsi made the remarks in a keynote address at the 2026 ECOWAS Court of Justice International Conference in Dakar, Senegal, being held from September 21 to 25 under the theme, “ECOWAS Court of Justice at the Crossroads: Justice, Innovation, Human Rights Protection and the Future of Regional Integration in West Africa.”

“The enforcement of the Court’s orders remains thorny and, in the circumstances, intractable,” he said, arguing that the difficulty of reconciling state accountability with the authority of a supranational court affected the Court in a distinctive way.

According to Prof Abotsi, regional courts could become particularly vulnerable when their decisions begin to have significant consequences for governments.

“In a rather counterintuitive way, regional courts often become vulnerable precisely when they start looking effective and powerful,” he said.

He noted that stronger human rights jurisprudence could increase resistance from states whose actions or policies were challenged by the Court.

“The more impactful their human rights jurisprudence becomes, the more likely they are to encounter state discomfort and generate resistance to their work,” he said.

Prof Abotsi added that decisions criticising member states, whether arising from complaints brought by governments or individuals, could expose regional courts to political pressure.

“The more rebuke they issue to member states, whether in reaction to complaints by states or individuals, the more likely they are to be looked on with disdain or anger,” he said.

Independence must not be compromised

Prof Abotsi, however, stressed that political difficulties should not lead the ECOWAS Court to compromise its judicial independence.

He said the Court’s credibility was fundamentally tied to the confidence of both the public and member states in its ability to issue binding decisions without fear of political reprisals.

“Yet, like all courts, judicial independence remains indispensable to the credibility of regional tribunals like the ECCJ whose power and authority are shaped by the trust reposed in their capability to issue binding orders,” he said.

He cautioned against a situation in which judges might take potential political consequences into account when determining cases, arguing that this would undermine the Court’s ability to protect human rights and advance regional integration.

“Thus, a regional court that adopts a consequentialist posture reflective of its fears of political reprisals in judgments delivered cannot effectively protect human rights or sustain integration against the vagaries of interstate tensions and disputes,” he said.

For Prof Abotsi, the true test of member states’ commitment to regionalism was their willingness to respect judicial decisions even when those decisions were unfavourable or politically inconvenient.

“It would seem therefore that the true measure of commitment to regionalism lies not in celebrating judgments with which states agree, but in respecting judgments that states may find inconvenient,” he said.

Building a sustainable relationship with states

The UPSA Law School Dean said the ECOWAS Court needed to develop a sustainable institutional relationship with member states that would allow it to preserve its independence while managing political reactions to its decisions.

He described this as critical to the future of both the Court and the broader regional integration project.

“Designing a pathway out of this complication in which the Court remains detached in spite of political outrages with stoking reactions against its very existence is a key determinant of its future,” he said.

He argued that such a relationship would strengthen the supranational authority of the Court while reinforcing the collective interests of ECOWAS member states under a shared legal framework.

“That relational pathway will in the end, strengthen the supranational competency of the ECCJ but also reinforce the collective interest of ECOWAS states as individual countries with shared interests underpinned by the rule of law and mediated by a fair and trust judicial system,” Prof Abotsi said.

Enforcement remains a key concern

The question of enforcement has featured prominently at the Dakar conference, with the ECOWAS Court identifying the full and timely implementation of its judgments as a critical institutional challenge.

ECOWAS Commission President General Birame Diop has also described the gap between the authority of the Court’s decisions and their execution as one of the most serious tests of its credibility.

The Court has pursued engagements with member states to address compliance. In February 2026, its President, Justice Ricardo Gonçalves, stressed the importance of effective enforcement during a bilateral engagement with authorities in Sierra Leone, while similar discussions have been held with other member states.

The conference programme has consequently placed enforcement and compliance among its key areas of discussion, alongside human rights jurisprudence, artificial intelligence and data protection, arbitration and alternative dispute resolution, the proposed appellate chamber, environmental justice, and refugee protection and forced displacement.

Court’s role in regional integration

Prof Abotsi’s intervention comes at an important stage in the evolution of the ECOWAS Court, established as the principal judicial organ of the Community under the 1993 Revised ECOWAS Treaty.

The Court has developed a broad human rights mandate and continues to hear cases involving alleged violations of rights by member states, including matters concerning freedom of expression, detention and gender-based violations.

For Prof Abotsi, however, the authority generated by the Court’s jurisprudence must be matched by a commitment from member states to respect and implement its orders.

He linked the enforcement question directly to the future of ECOWAS integration, arguing that a regional integration project cannot function effectively if the judicial institutions responsible for interpreting and enforcing its rules lack sufficient authority.

The challenge, he said, was not for the Court to become politically confrontational, but to ensure that its decisions were made independently while member states honoured their obligations under the regional legal order.

Respect for judicial decisions, including those that may be inconvenient to governments, therefore remains central to the practical commitment required to sustain regionalism, Prof Abotsi maintained.