CRC Proposes New Petition-Led Procedure for Elimination of Chief Justice

Date: December 22, 2025 | Category: Constitutional Law, Governance, Ghana News

Introduction

In a landmark move aimed at strengthening democratic accountability, the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC) has submitted a comprehensive proposal to President John Mahama regarding the removal process of the Chief Justice. Spearheaded by Professor Henry Kwasi Prempeh, this new framework introduces a structured, petition-led mechanism designed to balance the crucial need for judicial oversight with the imperative of judicial independence.

For decades, the procedure for removing a sitting Chief Justice has been a subject of intense debate, often shrouded in ambiguity and susceptible to political maneuvering. The CRC’s latest recommendations, presented on Monday, December 22, seek to demystify this process. By establishing clear thresholds for evidence, strict timelines, and independent tribunals, the proposal aims to ensure that any removal proceedings are grounded in law rather than political expediency. This article breaks down the mechanics of this proposed constitutional amendment, its potential impact on the rule of law, and what it means for the Ghanaian justice system.

Key Points

Background

The role of the Chief Justice is pivotal within the Ghanaian legal system. As the head of the judiciary and the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice is responsible for the administration of justice, case management, and the upholding of the rule of law. Historically, Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution provided the basis for the removal of Justices of the Superior Courts, including the Chief Justice, on grounds of stated misbehavior or inability to perform functions.

The Need for Reform

Despite the existence of constitutional provisions, the practical application of these rules has often been contentious. Critics have argued that the previous processes lacked transparency and were too easily influenced by the executive branch. The Constitutional Review Committee, established to examine the workings of the 1992 Constitution, identified this gap as a critical area requiring reform to deepen Ghana’s constitutional democracy.

Context of the Proposal

The submission of these proposals to President John Mahama marks a significant milestone in the CRC’s mandate. Professor Henry Kwasi Prempeh and his team have focused on creating a system that is not only robust but also resistant to abuse. The new proposal shifts the focus from a purely administrative or political decision to a quasi-judicial process that prioritizes evidence and due process.

Analysis

The CRC’s proposal represents a delicate balancing act. On one hand, it seeks to enhance accountability; on the bench; on the other, it builds fortifications around the judiciary to ensure it remains free from political capture.

The Petition-Led Mechanism

The core of the new proposal is the “petition-led procedure.” Under this system, the process is triggered not by the executive or parliament directly, but by a “person aggrieved.” This democratizes the oversight process but also places a high burden of proof on the petitioner. The requirement that the petition be submitted confidentially to the Council of State ensures that the initial screening is handled by a body that is relatively insulated from the volatile nature of partisan politics.

Filtering Mechanisms: The Council of State and Prima Facie

A critical component of the analysis is the 7-day review period. This creates a “filter” designed to weed out frivolous or politically motivated complaints immediately. The legal standard of “prima facie” (on first appearance) is used here. If the Council’s judicial committee does not see credible evidence of misconduct or inability to work, the process stops. This protects the Chief Justice from endless harassment through baseless allegations.

The Role of the Tribunal

If the petition passes the initial filter, the investigation moves to a specialized tribunal. The composition of this five-member body is strategically diverse:

• The Presidency and Parliament: Ensures executive and legislative branches are represented.
• The Public Service Commission: Brings an administrative perspective.
• The National House of Chiefs: Incorporates traditional authority and community values.
• The Judicial Council: Ensures legal expertise and adherence to judicial standards.

The chairperson, a former Supreme Court Justice, provides the necessary gravitas and legal acumen to preside over complex hearings. By mandating that hearings be held in camera (privately), the CRC aims to protect the reputations of all parties involved until a final verdict is reached, preventing trial by media.

Timeline Enforcement

The 60-day deadline for the tribunal to publish findings is a significant improvement. It prevents the indefinite suspension of a Chief Justice, which could destabilize the judiciary. This ensures that if the allegations are unfounded, the Chief Justice is reinstated quickly; if they are founded, the judiciary can move to fill the vacancy without delay.

Practical Advice

Understanding the gravity of these proposed changes is essential for legal practitioners, civil society organizations, and the general public. Here is how stakeholders can navigate or prepare for this potential new legal landscape.

For Potential Petitioners

If this proposal is enacted, filing a petition to remove a Chief Justice will be a high-stakes legal undertaking. It is not a matter for casual complaint.

• Gather Concrete Evidence: Vague accusations will likely fail the prima facie test. Petitioners must compile documentary evidence, witness statements, or legal precedents that directly relate to “stated misbehavior” or inability to perform functions.
• Understand the Threshold: The behavior must be severe enough to warrant removal, not merely administrative disagreement.
• Legal Representation: Given the complexity of constitutional law, engaging a lawyer experienced in public law and constitutional litigation is practically mandatory.

For the Judiciary and Legal Community

The proposed changes signal a shift toward greater transparency. Judicial officers should anticipate a climate where accountability is more visible. While the process protects the independence of the office, it also signals that no one is above the law. Maintaining impeccable ethical standards is the best defense against potential petitions.

For Civil Society and Media

Media outlets and civil society organizations play a crucial role in monitoring how this process is implemented. However, because the tribunal hearings are in camera, the media must rely on official statements and the final report. It is advisable to focus on the procedural integrity of the process rather than speculating on the details of private hearings to avoid contempt of tribunal issues.

FAQ

Conclusion

The Constitutional Review Committee’s proposal to introduce a petition-led procedure for the removal of the Chief Justice is a transformative step for Ghana’s jurisprudence. By codifying a transparent, evidence-based, and time-bound process, the CRC addresses long-standing concerns about accountability and political interference.

This framework aims to build public trust by ensuring that the removal of a Chief Justice is a rare event, triggered only by substantiated allegations and handled with the highest level of procedural fairness. If adopted, these recommendations will likely serve as a global benchmark for balancing judicial independence with democratic accountability.

Sources

• Primary Source: Constitutional Review Committee (CRC) Report and Recommendations submitted to the President of the Republic of Ghana.
• Legal Framework: The 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana (specifically provisions regarding the Superior Courts and the Council of State).
• Institutional Mandate: Official statements from the Office of the President regarding the submission of the CRC report.
• Expert Commentary: Analysis by Professor Henry Kwasi Prempeh and the CRC Secretariat.