Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie faced calls to apologize after remarks during visits to state-owned enterprises, with the Judicial Service defending his comments as made in “good faith” and emphasizing judicial independence.
Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie’s comments during visits to state-owned enterprises (SOEs) on 2 September 2026 sparked a debate over judicial neutrality, with the Judicial Service asserting his remarks were made in “good faith” and not intended to undermine the judiciary’s independence. The controversy intensified after the chief justice praised the performance of the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF) and the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT), while questioning management practices under the previous administration.
Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie’s comments were made in ‘good
Judicial Secretary Musah Ahmed stated in a 4 September 2026 statement that Baffoe-Bonnie’s observations during outreach engagements were made “in good faith” and not intended to serve a purpose inimical to judicial independence. The statement addressed public reactions to the chief justice’s comments, which included questioning what had been done during the past eight years at SSNIT, referencing its history of asset disposal plans. The statement was signed by the Judicial Secretary and emphasized the chief justice’s commitment to upholding the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
During his visit to MIIF on 2 September, Baffoe-Bonnie commended the institution’s current management, saying, I must congratulate you. I mean, you have done marvellously well,
while also noting, Sometimes when we hear the things that you have done, the things that some organisations are doing now, we wonder; some of us keep wondering what really we have been doing in the past eight years.
At SSNIT, he compared current management practices to previous plans to dispose of assets, including the Labadi Beach Hotel, and lamented the state of affairs under the previous administration. The Judicial Service emphasized that the chief justice remained committed to upholding the judiciary’s integrity and promoting justice.
Political activist and physician Dr. Arthur Kobina Kennedy criticized the chief justice’s remarks as beneath the dignity of his office and urged him to apologize. What you did was beneath the dignity of your office, and it did not reflect well on you or the judiciary,
Kennedy said in a video commentary. He argued that Baffoe-Bonnie’s comments risked creating the impression of political bias, particularly after questioning past management practices at SSNIT and MIIF. Kennedy also criticized supporters of both the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) for what he described as selective outrage over the controversy, accusing NPP supporters of hypocrisy for previously defending former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo’s conduct but now objecting to Baffoe-Bonnie’s remarks.
Ghana Judicial Service explains chief justice’s SOE remarks
The Ghana Center for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) warned that such commentary could create a perception of political bias, compromise the Judiciary’s non-partisan mandate, and risk breaching the Code of Conduct for Judges and Magistrates. The organization called for the chief justice to exercise restraint in public appearances, citing concerns about perceived partisan alignment. The New Patriotic Party (NPP) also criticized the comments, questioning the chief justice’s neutrality, while the National Democratic Congress (NDC) did not issue a public statement. Public reactions were mixed, with some supporting the chief justice’s right to comment on SOE performance if based on measurable indicators, while others echoed fears of judicial overreach.
The Judicial Service’s statement did not include an apology or retraction of Baffoe-Bonnie’s remarks, leaving the debate unresolved. The chief justice’s next steps remain unclear, but the controversy has highlighted tensions between judicial oversight and political neutrality. As the discussion continues, the judiciary’s ability to maintain perceived impartiality will remain under scrutiny.
Apologise and don’t do it again
On 2 September, Baffoe-Bonnie visited SSNIT and MIIF alongside members of the Council for Legal Education and Training. At MIIF, he positively assessed the institution’s work and asked about developments in Ghana over the previous eight years. At SSNIT, he referenced past plans to dispose of assets and compared them to current management practices. The Judicial Service’s 4 September statement reiterated that the chief justice’s observations were made in good faith and not intended to undermine judicial independence.
CDD-Ghana’s statement, issued on 4 September, warned that the chief justice’s remarks could be interpreted as an explicit comparison between the current and previous administrations, creating a perception of partisan political endorsement. Such commentary creates a perception of political bias, compromises the Judiciary’s non-partisan mandate, and risks breaching the Code of Conduct for Judges and Magistrates,
the Center said. The organization emphasized the need for the chief justice to avoid remarks that could erode public trust in the judiciary’s neutrality.
Dr. Kennedy’s critique extended to both political parties, arguing that NPP and NDC supporters were being hypocritical by focusing on the chief justice’s conduct while overlooking similar actions by previous leaders. He stressed that the chief justice’s role as a public exemplar required caution to avoid undermining trust in the judiciary. The Judicial Service’s statement did not address these criticisms directly but reaffirmed its commitment to judicial independence.
