By Boakye Stephen, Kumasi, Ghana | Reporting for Ghanaian News, Canada
March 24, 2026
A Ghanaian citizen has taken a bold legal step by dragging the Attorney-General to the Supreme Court, challenging the government’s reported attempt to rename Kotoka International Airport.
The plaintiff, Austin Kwabena Brako-Powers, is asking the apex court to declare the decision unconstitutional, null, and void. He argues that the Executive arm of government has no authority to change the airport’s name without following the proper legislative process.
The Legal Argument
According to the writ filed on March 13, 2026, the current name of the airport is protected under the General Kotoka Trust Decree, 1969 (NLCD 339).
The suit states clearly:
“Any Executive order purportedly issued to effect the renaming… is null, void, and of no legal effect.”
At the heart of the case is a fundamental constitutional principle — that the law is supreme over executive action.
Brako-Powers contends that:
- The decree establishing the airport’s name remains valid
- Only Parliament has the authority to amend or repeal it
- Any attempt to bypass this process violates Articles 11(1)(d) and 11(4) of the 1992 Constitution
His lawyer, Michael Akosah, is also seeking both interim and perpetual injunctions to prevent the government from implementing the proposed new name, “Accra International Airport,” until due legal process is followed.
Historical Context
Kotoka International Airport was named after Emmanuel Kwasi Kotoka, a key figure in the 1966 Ghana coup d’état that removed Ghana’s first President, Kwame Nkrumah, from power.
The proposed renaming has reignited a long-standing national debate. While some Ghanaians see the current name as controversial due to its association with a military coup, others argue that it reflects an important part of the country’s political history that should not be erased.
Commentary: More Than Just a Name
This case goes far beyond the name of an airport — it strikes at the core of Ghana’s constitutional democracy.
At issue is whether the country is governed strictly by law or by executive convenience. If the Executive can unilaterally rename a national monument without parliamentary approval, it could set a troubling precedent.
Today, it may be an airport. Tomorrow, it could be any law or institution.
This lawsuit, therefore, serves as a critical test of constitutional discipline and governance in Ghana.
The Legal Reality
The plaintiff’s case is grounded in clear legal reasoning:
- Laws remain binding until they are properly amended or repealed
- Executive power is limited and must operate within legal boundaries
- The Constitution stands above all political decisions
Ignoring these principles risks weakening Ghana’s legal framework and undermining public confidence in state institutions.
The Political and Moral Question
Beyond legality, the issue raises a deeper national conversation:
Should Ghana continue to honour figures associated with coups, or should it reconsider such recognitions?
However, one principle remains clear — moral debates must follow legal procedures. Attempting to correct history without adhering to the law could create more problems than it solves.
A Critical Warning
Observers caution against a growing pattern where:
- Decisions are announced first
- Legal justification is sought afterward
Such an approach can erode trust in governance and trigger avoidable constitutional conflicts.
Final Thought
This case is likely to shape more than just the future name of an airport. It could define:
- The limits of executive authority in Ghana
- The strength of the country’s constitutional order
- The role of citizens in holding government accountable
If the courts uphold the Constitution, it will reinforce a powerful democratic principle:
In a true democracy, even the government is subject to the law — not above it.
