The actions of Justice Clemence Jackson Honyenuga, a justice of the Supreme Court came up strongly on Friday as the leadership of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) berated Ghana’s judiciary for being riddled with “unreasoned judgements”.
In the assessment of the country’s biggest opposition party, “this phenomenon of unreasoned judgments is a clear manifestation of dereliction of judicial duties.”
NDC’s General Secretary Johnson Asiedu Nketiah explained to the media that the Supreme Court in recent times “has handed down some judgments and rulings that do not make any legal or factual sense because the court failed to assign any reasons for these judgments.”
He noted that these rulings by the courts are “devoid of the factual matrix of the case, the case and arguments presented by the parties, the legal principles upon which the judgment is based, and how those legal principles apply or do not apply to the facts of the case.”
The party cited the about five-year old trial of former COCOBOD Chief Executive Dr Stephen Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo at the high court presided over by Justice Clemence Honyenuga.
The case has been cited by political analysts as a politically motivated trial and has seen several, albeit unsuccessful, applications asking for the recusal of the trial judge for exhibiting what defence lawyers described as “hatred and bias” against Dr. Opuni.
HALLUCINATING
For instance, Justice Honyenuga, in December 2021, whilst delivery his ruling on an application for his recusal, questioned the accused’s mental health.
“I think that the first accused must have been hallucinating when DW1 gave evidence because no such thing happened as the first accused has stated in paragraph 17 in his affidavit in support,” the judge said in an open court whilst reading his written ruling.
He also accused Dr. Opuni of spewing lies.
“Further, the averment in paragraph 11 is the imagination of the first accused and a blatant lie calculated to throw dust in the eyes of everyone.”
Dr. Opuni, Justice Honyenuga said, “must learn to speak the truth because his ocular observation is different from the majority of us who were in the court room.”
MOST DISGUSTING
Justice Honyenuga further ruled that claims by Dr. Opuni that he the judge had said that the evidence of the accused’s witness cannot exonerate him is “most disgusting” and an effort to underrate his “intelligence and integrity”.
“In conclusion, the application is malicious, mischievous, frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process”.
Lawyers of Dr. Opuni, based on the judge’s ruling and other orders issued by him, applied to the Supreme Court to remove the judge from the case after Justice Honyenuga dismissed an application asking him to recuse himself for allegedly being biased.
The Supreme Court was quoted by the NDC to have said: “It is our considered opinion that the record does not reflect a personal interest by the trial judge in the matters in issue and the making of discriminatory orders to warrant the grant of an order of certiorari to quash the proceedings and orders of the trial court dated 16th December 2021. Regarding the application for prohibition we have thoroughly examined the processes filed by the parties and do not find the existence of a real likelihood of bias on the part of the trial judge such as would prevent the conduct of a fair trial by the judge. Accordingly, we dismiss the application in its entirety.”
But according to Mr. Asiedu Nketiah, this and other rulings at the apex court, in particular, “have dampened our faith in the court and it was this loss of faith that had provoked our petition to the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth of Nations regarding various acts of human rights violations, criminal persecutions and harassment of the members and supporters of the NDC by the Government of Ghana headed by His Excellency, President Nana Addo Danquah Akufo-Addo.”
He stated further, “the NDC observes that our democracy cannot operate efficiently and deliver the values of freedom, justice, development and equality of opportunity for all citizens, regardless of political affiliation, if our judiciary, particularly, elements within the Supreme Court, become or are perceived to be the rented agents or the political wing of a political party.”
He said the party is bringing all these things out to seek “remedial action promptly and effectively” in the judicial system.
