… Over partisan remarks
The opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) has called for the resignation of Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, accusing him of compromising the political neutrality expected of the head of Ghana’s Judiciary.
The demand, contained in a statement issued yesterday, Thursday, September 3, 2026, follows the circulation of a video in which the NPP says the Chief Justice made political comparisons that appeared to favour the performance of the current National Democratic Congress (NDC) administration and its appointed chief executives over the previous NPP government.
Interestingly, the controversy has revived memories of former Court of Appeal judge Justice Clemence Honyenuga, whose public praise of former President Nana Akufo-Addo and apparent endorsement of his second-term bid triggered accusations of political bias while he was presiding over the trial of former Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) Chief Executive Dr Stephen Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo.
In the video currently circulating, Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, at the offices of Mineral Income Investment Fund (MIIF), is heard making comparative remarks on the performance of state institutions under the current NDC administration and the previous NPP government.
“Sometimes when we hear how well some state organizations are doing now, we wonder what we really have been doing in the past eight years,” the Chief Justice is heard saying.
The NPP described the remarks as deeply troubling and inconsistent with the Chief Justice’s constitutional responsibilities.
The opposition party argued that the head of the Judiciary must remain above partisan politics and questioned whether the Chief Justice could continue to preside impartially over cases involving members of the NPP or matters connected to the current government.
The party cited Articles 125 and 127 of the 1992 Constitution, which guarantee the independence of the Judiciary and provide safeguards against interference in the administration of justice.
It also referred to the judicial oath, which requires judges to administer justice without fear, favour, affection or ill will.
According to the NPP, the alleged comments form part of what it considers a broader pattern of conduct that could undermine public confidence in the political independence of the Judiciary.
The party further alleged that the Chief Justice had increasingly appeared at events involving political appointees of the current administration, raising questions about how such associations could affect public perception of judicial neutrality.
The NPP also took exception to an alleged statement by the Chief Justice that “everything must be done to ensure that the agenda of the President succeeds”.
It questioned what such a declaration would mean for accused persons appearing before the courts in cases linked to the government’s Operation Recover All Loot (ORAL) initiative.
The party argued that because ORAL forms part of the government’s agenda and some persons associated with the NPP are facing proceedings connected to the initiative, any perceived alignment between the Judiciary and the Executive could affect public confidence in the fairness of such cases.
“The Chief Justice’s constitutional obligation is to the 1992 Constitution and not to the President, the governing party or any government programme,” the NPP maintained.
The party also alleged that some cases involving its members had been dealt with at unusual speed, citing the incarceration of Ashanti Regional NPP Chairman Bernard Antwi Boasiako, popularly known as Chairman Wontumi.
It further claimed that cases involving persons opposed to the government received comparatively faster attention, while matters involving government supporters progressed more slowly.
Beyond the question of political neutrality, the NPP criticized the state of infrastructure within the Judiciary.
The party alleged that several court facilities and judicial offices across the country were in poor condition, with courtrooms and registries requiring significant rehabilitation.
It accused the Chief Justice of failing to sufficiently highlight the infrastructure challenges facing the Judiciary or advocate strongly enough for their resolution.
Contrasting the condition of judicial facilities with what it described as the Chief Justice’s increased participation in activities involving government ministries, departments, and agencies, the NPP declared:
“With respect, My Lord, the leaking roofs are in your courts, not in the ministries.”
The opposition party is demanding an immediate and unequivocal withdrawal of what it considers the Chief Justice’s partisan political comments and his alleged pledge of support for President John Dramani Mahama’s agenda.
It said that should he decline to do so, he should resign and openly join the governing NDC.
The NPP has also urged President Mahama to fill the vacant Council of State seat and to publicly clarify any arrangements regarding the Chief Justice’s post-retirement role.
The party said it would hold a press conference at a later date to present what it described as the “full record” of the Chief Justice’s conduct.
The statement, signed by NPP General Secretary Justin Kodua Frimpong, stressed that the Judiciary belongs to the people of Ghana and must remain independent of political influence.
The NPP’s current position has, however, revived the controversy surrounding Justice Clemence Honyenuga, a former Court of Appeal judge who was later nominated to the Supreme Court by former President Akufo-Addo.
Justice Honyenuga, who is also the Paramount Chief of the Nyagbo Traditional Area under the stool name Torgbui Ashui Nyagasi V, came under intense criticism after publicly praising President Akufo-Addo and suggesting that Ghanaians should consider giving him another term in office.
Speaking at a durbar of chiefs and people of the Afadzato South District during President Akufo-Addo’s tour of the Volta and Oti regions, Justice Honyenuga praised the former President’s first-term policies, particularly the Free Senior High School programme.
“We wish to congratulate you for the excellent manner you are governing this dear country of ours, Ghana, and the significant gains made in the economy in your first term,” he said.
He described the Free SHS programme as unprecedented.
“Your Free SHS programme is unprecedented in the history of Ghana, in a first term, as it covers the whole country,” he said.
Justice Honyenuga subsequently expressed the hope that President Akufo-Addo would be given another term.
“It is our hope that with your vision and the gains made in your first term, Ghanaians may consider giving you another four years,” he said.
At the time, however, the then-ruling NPP defended Justice Honyenuga, arguing that his responsibilities as a traditional ruler should not be confused with his judicial duties and insisting that his independence as a judge related to his decisions in court.
The then opposition NDC took the opposite position. The NDC Volta Regional Secretariat condemned the Paramount Chief and judge, describing his remarks as a violation of the Judicial Code of Conduct.
“While taking due cognizance of the fact that Justice Honyenuga may have made those comments in his capacity as a traditional ruler, it is reprehensible and regrettable, especially for a man who is supposed to know our laws better than any ordinary man and to uphold and respect the same,” the party said at the time.
The NDC further argued that the conduct struck at the sanctity of the Judiciary.
“Not only is this conduct by the Appeals Court Judge a blatant violation of the Judicial Code of Conduct, but it very well sins against the very sanctity of the institution of the Judiciary as we know it,” the party added.
Justice Honyenuga later apologized during his vetting by Parliament’s Appointments Committee following his nomination to the Supreme Court.
He told legislators that the comments did not reflect his personal political views and explained that he had spoken on behalf of the chiefs and people of the area.
According to him, the intention had been to wish President Akufo-Addo well rather than formally endorse his candidature.
He said that if, because of political dissatisfaction, some people were unhappy with what he had said, “then I am sorry”.
Justice Honyenuga also insisted during his vetting that judges do not consider cases through political lenses.
He told the Appointments Committee that judges determine cases on their merits and the evidence presented before them.
The Honyenuga controversy was particularly significant because he was the judge presiding over the criminal trial involving the State, former COCOBOD Chief Executive Dr Stephen Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo.
The two defendants repeatedly accused Justice Honyenuga of bias, allegations he denied.
At one stage, he was removed from sitting on the case by his colleagues at the Supreme Court for making prejudicial pronouncements on the matter.
He was, however, later reinstated following a review process at the Supreme Court initiated by the then Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame.
The case, which began in 2018, had become heavily politicized, with President Akufo-Addo and several leading members of the then-ruling NPP repeatedly citing the prosecution as evidence of alleged corruption involving members of the opposition NDC, with which Dr Opuni was associated.
Justice Honyenuga eventually retired from the bench, leading to the appointment of a new trial judge, Justice Kwasi Anokye Gyimah.
Justice Gyimah, sitting in the High Court in Accra, attempted to restart the trial, citing the controversies surrounding the earlier proceedings.
His approach, however, brought him into conflict with the expectations of the Akufo-Addo administration, according to critics of developments surrounding the case.
Just days after former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo was sworn into office on June 12, 2023, Justice Gyimah was informed that he was to vacate his position in Accra and relocate to Kumasi.
He was directed to begin work in the Ashanti Regional capital on July 3, 2023, the same day the Court of Appeal was scheduled to deliver its landmark ruling allowing the trial to restart.
Justice Gyimah was subsequently replaced by Justice Aboagye Tandoh of the Winneba High Court, who became the third trial judge in the matter.
The transfer deprived the national capital of a judge widely regarded by lawyers and court users as highly knowledgeable in land law.
Justice Gyimah holds a Master of Laws degree in International Criminal Justice and Armed Conflict from the University of Nottingham in the United Kingdom and previously taught law at the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration.
Before his appointment to the bench, he taught the Law of Immovable Property principally and later developed a reputation as a firm and principled judge handling land matters.
The renewed debate over judicial neutrality has therefore brought together two controversies separated by several years: the defense mounted by the NPP when Justice Honyenuga publicly praised and appeared to endorse President Akufo-Addo’s re-election bid, and the party’s present demand for Chief Justice Baffoe-Bonnie to withdraw allegedly partisan comments or resign.
For critics, the contrasting positions raise questions about political consistency in the defence of judicial independence.
For the NPP, however, the alleged conduct of the current Chief Justice represents a direct threat to public confidence in the Judiciary and requires an immediate response.
Whether the Ghana Bar Association, which has frequently defended judges against public attacks and criticism, will intervene in the latest controversy remains unclear.
However, President of IMANI Africa, Franklin Cudjoe, has rejected calls by the NPP for Chief Justice Baffoe-Bonnie to retract the comments or resign.
Mr Cudjoe argued that the Chief Justice was merely expressing an opinion and had not broken any law.
“Which law has he broken?” Mr Cudjoe asked during an appearance on Eyewitness News on Thursday, September 3, 2026.
According to Mr Cudjoe, the criticism of the Chief Justice over comments comparing the performance of the current administration with that of the previous government was misplaced.
He said the remarks should be understood within the context in which they were made, insisting that the Chief Justice was participating in a discussion on governance rather than making a pronouncement from the bench.
“He wasn’t sitting in court making judgments on public enterprises. He was on a call together with others, and they were giving them scenarios,” Mr Cudjoe said.
He also criticised what he described as the excessive politicisation of public discourse, arguing that political actors should focus on addressing governance challenges rather than turning every public comment into a partisan controversy.
“All you should do is sit down, go back, look at all the problems you created, provide solutions. That’s what we are actually supposed to do,” he said.
Mr Cudjoe maintained that the Chief Justice’s comments did not, in his view, make him an “errant speaker” and should not be grounds for demanding his resignation.
The Chief Justice has yet to publicly respond to the NPP’s allegations. The Judicial Service has also not issued a statement on the matter.
