Former MP Inusah Fuseini Accuses Ghana Bar Association of Political Bias: A Constitutional Watchdog in Crisis?

Introduction

The Ghana Bar Association (GBA), long regarded as the guardian of legal ethics and constitutional integrity in Ghana, faces unprecedented challenges to its credibility. Former Member of Parliament (MP) and ex-Minister of Lands and Natural Resources, Alhaji Inusah Fuseini, has publicly lambasted the association for perceived political bias, alleging that it has abandoned its role as an impartial regulator of the legal profession. This article unpacks Fuseini’s claims, examines the historical context of the GBA’s public stance, and explores the implications for Ghana’s judicial landscape.

Analysis

Political Asymmetry in GBA’s Public Stance

Alhaji Fuseini’s criticism centers on the GBA’s alleged shift from a non-partisan watchdog to a politically aligned entity. Since his interview on TV3 (October 16, 2025), historical records reveal stark contrasts in the GBA’s responses to constitutional breaches under different administrations. The former MP argues that the association’s vocal activism during the National Democratic Congress (NDC) era—particularly under President Jerry Rawlings—diverges sharply from its silence during the tenure of the New Patriotic Party (NPP).

Case Study 1: The Removal of Auditor-General Daniel Yaw Domelevo

Fuseini highlights the 2018 dissolution of Auditor-General Daniel Yaw Domelevo as a pivotal example of the GBA’s inaction. Despite the Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling that President Akufo-Addo unconstitutionally dismissed Domelevo, the GBA issued no public condemnation. This silence contrasts with its role in advocating for judicial independence during the 1990s.

Case Study 2: The Dismissal of Electoral Commission Chairperson Charlotte Osei

Another contentious case involves the removal of Electoral Commission Chairperson Mrs. Charlotte Osei and her deputies in 2018. While the GBA condemned the sacking of Osei as a violation of constitutional protocols in 2012 under the NDC, its lack of similar outcry during the NPP-led administration suggests partisan alignment, according to Fuseini.

Historical Shift Post-2000: From Activism to Complacency

Fuseini points to the Ghana Bar Association’s 2001 member statement declaring, “We will not comment on political cases.” This policy, he claims, institutionalized a culture of silence, allowing political interference in judicial affairs to escalate over two decades. The former MP emphasizes that such a stance undermines public trust and erodes the GBA’s legitimacy as a regulatory body.

Summary

Alhaji Fuseini’s allegations paint a troubling picture of the Ghana Bar Association as a politically compromised institution. By contrasting its historical activism with recent inaction on constitutional breaches, he argues that the GBA’s credibility is irreparably damaged. The cases of Domelevo and Charlotte Osei serve as emblematic examples of selective justice, raising urgent questions about the GBA’s commitment to transparency and neutrality. This crisis demands urgent reforms to restore the Bar’s ethical authority.

Key Points

Practical Advice for Legal Professionals

For Ghanaian lawyers and law students navigating this landscape:

Evaluate Membership Critically

Weigh the benefits of GBA membership against potential risks to professional reputation. As Fuseini suggests, alternative associations may offer better alignment with transparency goals.

Advocate for Public Accountability

Legal practitioners should leverage public platforms to demand GBA accountability, ensuring constitutional watchdog duties remain uncompromised.

Document and Report Governance Gaps

Individuals with evidence of political interference within the GBA should submit formal complaints to Ghana’s Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ).

Points of Caution

While Fuseini’s criticism is valid, legal professionals should:

Avoid Speculative Critiques

Public accusations require robust, verifiable evidence. Claims of political bias should stem from documented patterns, not isolated incidents.

Consider Collective Action Over Individual Dissent

Isolated members withdrawing from the GBA may dilute the profession’s unified voice. Organizing peer discussions could strengthen advocacy for reform.

Comparison: NDC vs. NPP-Era GBA Response

Legal Implications

The GNA’s alleged political bias raises concerns under Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, which mandates judicial independence (Article 12) and the separation of powers. If the GBA, as a key legal stakeholder, engages in partisan behavior, it risks undermining public confidence in Ghana’s judiciary. Additionally, the Bar’s self-regulation framework may face scrutiny if perceived as aiding unconstitutional governance.

Conclusion

Inusah Fuseini’s charges against the Ghana Bar Association highlight a crisis of trust in Ghana’s legal profession. While the GBA’s historical role as a constitutional guardian is commendable, its recent silence on governance breaches demands urgent reassessment. Legal professionals must balance membership loyalty with ethical vigilance to preserve the judiciary’s independence. Transparency and impartiality are non-negotiable pillars of democracy, and their erosion in Ghana’s legal institutions threatens national democracy itself.

FAQ

Disclaimer

The views, comments, opinions, contributions, and statements made by Contributors on this platform may not necessarily represent the views or policy of the owners of Life Pulse Daily.