Date: August 27, 2026 By: Ebenezer Adugyamfi/ Emmanuel Ayiku for GhanaianNewsCanada
The Minority Caucus in Parliament has boycotted the vetting of three Supreme Court justice nominees, dramatically walking out of the Appointments Committee and refusing to participate in the approval process.
The boycott follows a long-running dispute over President John Dramani Mahama’s judicial appointments, with the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) insisting that the nominations are unconstitutional while legal challenges relating to the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo remain unresolved.
The decision brings fresh political tension to Parliament as lawmakers prepare to consider the nominees for one of the country’s highest judicial offices.
Minority stages walkout
The Minority members on the Appointments Committee declined to take part in Wednesday’s vetting, arguing that participating would legitimize what they describe as an unconstitutional process.
Led by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, the caucus has consistently maintained that the nomination of new Supreme Court justices should not proceed until all pending court cases connected to the former Chief Justice’s removal have been determined.
The walkout effectively left only the Majority members to continue the vetting proceedings.
Why the NPP is protesting
The opposition argues that President Mahama’s judicial appointments risk undermining judicial independence and altering the composition of the Supreme Court while constitutional questions remain before the courts.
According to the Minority, the government should have waited for the legal processes surrounding the former Chief Justice to conclude before nominating additional judges to the apex court.
The caucus has repeatedly described the appointments as a matter that goes beyond politics, insisting that it concerns the integrity of Ghana’s constitutional democracy.
Vetting continues despite boycott
Despite the absence of the Minority, the Appointments Committee proceeded with the scheduled vetting of the three nominees.
Under Parliament’s Standing Orders, the committee is permitted to continue its work provided it has the required quorum, meaning the boycott does not automatically halt the approval process.
The Majority has defended the nominations, arguing that the President acted within the powers granted under Article 144 of the 1992 Constitution, which allows the appointment of Supreme Court justices upon the advice of the Judicial Council and subject to parliamentary approval.
A growing constitutional battle
The latest boycott is the newest chapter in an escalating confrontation between the NDC government and the NPP opposition over the future of Ghana’s judiciary.
In recent weeks, the Minority has filed motions seeking to suspend judicial vetting and has vowed to resist appointments it believes are constitutionally flawed.
Although those attempts have been unsuccessful, Wednesday’s walkout demonstrates the opposition’s continued refusal to endorse the process.
What happens next?
The Appointments Committee is expected to complete its vetting and submit a report to Parliament, where the nominees will eventually face approval or rejection by the House.
While the Minority’s boycott sends a strong political message, it does not legally prevent Parliament from considering the nominees.
The constitutional and political debate surrounding the appointments, however, is likely to continue as court proceedings related to the former Chief Justice remain pending and tensions over judicial independence persist.
