Vincent Ekow Assafuah has highlighted the historical parallels between the ongoing legal challenge to the constitutional status of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) and past political efforts to undermine the Association’s role in Ghana’s judicial system.
Responding to the lawsuit filed by South Dayi MP Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, legal practitioner Israel Tetteh, and the Ghana Law Society, Assafuah emphasized that the current matter must be viewed within the broader historical context of Ghana’s legal and political development.
“This is not the first time the GBA has found itself at the center of Ghana’s constitutional and political battles,” Assafuah stated in a social media post.
He recalled events from the 1980s during the Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) era, when Public Tribunals were established under PNDCL 24 and PNDCL 78. These tribunals, he noted, bypassed the regular judicial system, restricted avenues for appeal, and placed serious criminal cases in the hands of political appointees. At the time, the GBA strongly opposed these developments, boycotting the tribunals and condemning them as threats to judicial independence—a move that significantly strained the relationship between the Bar and the state.
Assafuah suggested that the current legal challenge represents a continuation of this pattern. He referenced recent tensions between the GBA and the executive branch, particularly the Association’s criticism of the President’s removal of the Chief Justice. “Whenever the GBA asserts its role in defending judicial independence, there are attempts to curtail its influence,” he observed.
He also provided insight into the central legal question before the Supreme Court: whether the GBA’s mention in the 1992 Constitution establishes it as the exclusive professional body for lawyers in Ghana, or whether that reference is merely descriptive—thereby allowing for the existence and recognition of other legal associations.
While the plaintiffs argue that the constitutional reference to the GBA should be interpreted broadly, in line with the rights to freedom of association and equality before the law, Assafuah believes historical and constitutional evidence supports the GBA’s unique status.
“Successive constitutions have recognized the GBA by name, which indicates that the framers envisioned a unified Bar,” he explained. Advocates for this view maintain that unity within the legal profession is vital for maintaining professional standards and coherence.
He concluded that the Supreme Court faces a difficult task in balancing competing constitutional values. “The Court must weigh textual interpretation, historical precedent, and core constitutional principles—pluralism and freedom on one hand, coherence and stability on the other.”
The case, filed earlier this month, challenges the GBA’s position as the sole representative of legal professionals in Ghana. The Supreme Court is now tasked with determining whether the Association’s exclusive status is constitutionally valid or whether Ghana’s legal landscape should accommodate multiple lawyer associations.
Source: MyNewsGh.com
Comments
Post a Comment