Government Spokesperson Felix Ofosu Kwakye has sparked controversy by asserting that Ghana’s judiciary has consistently treated the National Democratic Congress unfairly for the past 32 years.
Speaking on Accra’s Channel 1 program Point of View, Kwakye recounted a series of judicial decisions that he believes underscore a deep-seated bias against the NDC—a bias that he argues dates back to the era of Rawlings and has persisted even during the presidency of Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo.
Kwakye cited several notable cases as evidence of this alleged injustice. He recalled that during the Rawlings era, the government lost nearly every case it brought before the courts, including high-profile disputes over events such as those on June 4th and December 31st, as well as the well-known GBC case and a matter involving ministerial vetting spearheaded by J.H. Mensah. In his view, these decisions were not mere legal outcomes but symptomatic of an institutional imbalance that has long worked against the NDC.
The government spokesperson did not stop at historical examples. He also drew attention to recent events under the current National Patriotic Party-led government, where he noted a stark contrast in judicial responsiveness. While Afenyo Markins’ case was fast-tracked and scheduled for a hearing within twelve hours, a case brought by the minority regarding the controversial e-levy has languished for three years. Moreover, Kwakye highlighted an incident in which a judge was abruptly replaced in one case by a “stroke of a pen” for Godfred Dame, yet in a similar situation involving Opuni, no such change was made. Even more pointed was his reference to a situation where a judge was removed after holding Kennedy Agyapong in contempt, while in another case involving the Montie three matter, the same judge continued to preside.
In a candid assessment, Kwakye argued that these inconsistencies reveal more than just administrative hiccups—they reflect a historical antipathy within the judiciary towards the NDC. “Justice ought not to be done on the basis of perception of political parties,” he insisted, calling for a renewed commitment to fairness and balance in the judicial system. He was quick to point out that while the Chief Justice enjoys an aura of independence, the patterns of decision-making over the decades suggest otherwise.
Kwakye’s remarks have added fuel to a long-standing debate about the impartiality of Ghana’s judicial institutions. Critics and supporters alike are now reexamining whether these perceived biases are symptomatic of deeper systemic issues or simply isolated incidents magnified by political rivalry. Some observers contend that the judiciary’s record should be a matter of public debate, given its critical role in upholding democracy and ensuring that no political party is unfairly targeted—or favored—by the law.
As the conversation continues, many are left to wonder how Ghana can restore confidence in its legal system. For now, Kwakye’s impassioned call for judicial balance resonates with those who believe that only through a fair and transparent process can the nation truly move forward.
