Renowned legal practitioner Thaddeus Sory has criticized the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) for what he described as selective activism and its silence on past judicial misconduct.
In a statement released on April 29, Sory challenged the GBA’s recent resolution demanding the reinstatement of the suspended Chief Justice and the withdrawal of the Acting Chief Justice’s administrative directive.
He noted the delay in the resolution, which was passed on Saturday, April 26, but only made public on Tuesday, April 29. Sory questioned the timing and sincerity of the GBA’s position, describing the demand for the President to revoke the Chief Justice’s suspension as “legally flawed and disrespectful.”
According to the GBA’s resolution, the President’s action was “unconstitutional” because it was made “in the absence of a published Constitutional Instrument, Statutory Instrument, or Regulation(s),” referencing Article 296 of the 1992 Constitution. Sory disagreed with this interpretation, stating that Article 146(10) of the Constitution clearly states the President may suspend the Chief Justice only after receiving advice from the Council of State.
“The word ‘may’ here does not grant discretion to act unilaterally,” he explained. “Once advised by the Council of State, the President is constitutionally bound to act—he must suspend.”
Sory also questioned the GBA’s silence during the Chief Justice’s time in office, particularly regarding what he called the Chief Justice’s administrative overreach, including the reassignment of judges and altering case allocations. He pointed out that the GBA did not object to these actions, asking whether they would have preferred a random method to assign cases.
Further, Sory alleged that the suspended Chief Justice issued unconstitutional and unlawful administrative guidelines, leading to “financial loss to the Republic through ill-conceived launches.” He asked, “Where was the Bar when the suspended Chief Justice issued unconstitutional and unlawful administrative guidelines and practice directions?”
Sory criticized the GBA for inconsistency and hypocrisy, accusing the Association of politicizing legal matters. He emphasized that the powers of the Chief Justice are vested in the office, not the individual, and that any constitutionally recognized Chief Justice, including one serving in an acting capacity, is empowered to assign cases.
Sory concluded by daring the GBA to test its claims in court. “There is no need for threats or rhetorical outrage. If the Bar believes it has a case, let it go to court. But history is not on their side. Past attempts have yielded embarrassing defeats.”
In a final remark, Sory made it clear: “The law is not in the bosom of the Bar!”
ALSO READ: