Kwabena Agyepong Vows to Scrap Retirement Age for Supreme Court Judges

Introduction

In a bold move that has ignited significant discourse within Ghana’s political and legal circles, New Patriotic Party (NPP) flagbearer hopeful, Ing. Kwabena Agyepong, has pledged to overhaul the country’s judicial structure. Specifically, he has vowed to abolish the mandatory retirement age for Supreme Court judges. This proposal, unveiled on January 20, 2026, is part of a broader judicial reform agenda aimed at enhancing the independence of the judiciary and curbing executive influence. As Ghana prepares for the 2028 general elections, Agyepong’s stance on judicial tenure and Supreme Court composition offers a critical lens into potential future constitutional amendments.

Key Points

Background

The Current Legal Framework

Under the current laws of Ghana, specifically the 1992 Constitution, the retirement age for Supreme Court judges is set at 70 years. This provision is outlined in Article 128(4) of the Constitution, which states that a Justice of the Supreme Court shall retire when they attain the age of seventy years. This mandatory retirement is a cornerstone of the judicial system, intended to ensure a regular turnover of judges and maintain the vitality of the bench.

Kwabena Agyepong’s Political Standing

Ing. Kwabena Agyepong is a prominent figure within the New Patriotic Party (NPP), having previously served as its General Secretary. As a flagbearer hopeful, he is positioning himself as a reformist candidate ahead of the party’s internal primaries scheduled for January 31, 2026. His focus on judicial reforms and constitutional amendments highlights a strategic effort to address long-standing concerns regarding the politicization of the judiciary in Ghana.

Analysis

Impact on Judicial Independence

Agyepong’s argument posits that removing the mandatory retirement age will reduce the frequency of judicial vacancies. Historically, the retirement of judges creates vacancies that are filled by the sitting President. By extending the tenure of judges, Agyepong aims to minimize the opportunities for executive appointments, which he argues are often driven by political patronage rather than merit. This shift could theoretically insulate the judiciary from executive interference and preserve institutional memory within the Supreme Court.

The Significance of Capping the Bench at 11

Proposing a cap of 11 judges aligns the Supreme Court with a more compact structure, potentially expediting case management and deliberations. A smaller bench size often reduces the logistical complexities of large judicial bodies and may foster greater cohesion in jurisprudence. However, this proposal would require a constitutional amendment, as the current Constitution does not specify a fixed maximum number of Supreme Court judges, leaving it to the discretion of the President acting on the advice of the Judicial Council.

Comparative Perspectives on Judicial Tenure

Globally, approaches to judicial retirement ages vary. For instance, United States Supreme Court justices serve for life, a system Agyepong’s proposal somewhat mirrors, though with the added caveat of medical fitness. In contrast, many Commonwealth nations have mandatory retirement ages similar to Ghana’s current system. Agyepong’s model suggests a hybrid approach: tenure based on performance and health, capped by a maximum bench size.

Practical Advice

Understanding the Legislative Process

For citizens and stakeholders following this development, it is essential to understand that a presidential pledge to change judicial tenure does not automatically enact law. Any change to the mandatory retirement age of Supreme Court judges requires a constitutional amendment under Article 289 of the 1992 Constitution. This process is rigorous, typically requiring a referendum or a supermajority vote in Parliament, depending on the nature of the amendment.

Engaging in Stakeholder Consultations

Agyepong has emphasized “stakeholder consultations.” For legal practitioners, civil society organizations, and the general public, this presents an opportunity to engage in dialogue regarding the pros and cons of removing age limits. Interested parties should monitor the NPP’s policy forums and the Justice Sector Reform discussions to voice concerns or support regarding judicial independence and capacity.

FAQ

Conclusion

Ing. Kwabena Agyepong’s proposal to scrap the mandatory retirement age for Supreme Court judges represents a significant shift in Ghana’s constitutional discourse. By coupling this with a cap on the number of judges, he aims to foster a judiciary that operates on merit and medical fitness rather than arbitrary age limits. While the proposal addresses concerns regarding executive influence and judicial independence, it inevitably raises questions about the necessary constitutional amendments and the long-term dynamics of the Supreme Court. As the 2026 NPP primaries approach, these policy positions will likely remain a focal point of national debate.

Sources

• Life Pulse Daily: “Latest News: Kwabena Agyepong vows to scrap retirement age for Supreme Court judges” (Published: 2026-01-20).
• Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992: Article 128 (Tenure of Office of Justices of the Superior Courts) and Article 289 (Procedure for Amending the Constitution).
• Judicial Service of Ghana: Official records on the composition of the Supreme Court.
• New Patriotic Party (NPP) Internal Communications: Flagbearer election schedules and candidate policy announcements.