In the span of three weeks following two landmark public statements by high-ranking members of Ghana’s ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), the nation has remained eerily silent on what many regard as glaring injustices within the justice delivery system. The absence of any official response—whether dissenting or supportive—from the party leadership has left observers questioning whether the NDC’s silence is a sign of agreement with the criticisms or mere indifference. What transpired on Thursday, May 28, 2026, was not merely a coincidence but a deliberate, if belated, intervention by two stalwarts of the party who dared to challenge systemic abuses that have long festered beneath the surface.
The events unfolded in two distinct yet thematically connected arenas: Parliament House in Accra and a funeral in Tamale, Northern Region. Both incidents marked a rare moment where NDC ministers—Mohammed Mubarak Muntaka, the Minister for the Interior, and Haruna Iddrisu, the Minister of Education—publicly dissented from what they described as unconstitutional, punitive, and politically motivated practices within the justice system. Their remarks, delivered with uncharacteristic vehemence, exposed a crisis that has eroded public trust in Ghana’s legal institutions.
The Interior Minister’s Scathing Critique of Remand Abuse
On the floor of Parliament, Minister Muntaka delivered a damning assessment of the remand and bail procedures currently in use across the country. His speech, delivered with the authority of a seasoned administrator, highlighted how the system had been weaponized against suspects, often without due process.
“Currently, remand is massively abused. With the least provocation, they say they’ve remanded somebody. You go to the police, and they remand people anyhow.”
Muntaka’s concerns were not merely theoretical. He cited excessively stringent bail conditions—financial demands, arbitrary restrictions, and prolonged detention—that effectively punished the accused before trial, a violation of Ghana’s constitutional presumption of innocence. He proposed the Community Service Bill as a potential remedy, arguing that it could reduce reliance on remand, alleviate prison congestion, and restore fairness to the system.
His remarks were particularly striking given his role as the Minister for the Interior, the very institution accused of overreaching in law enforcement. Yet, instead of defending the status quo, Muntaka challenged his own ministry, suggesting that even within the ruling party, there exists a growing recognition of systemic failures.
The Education Minister’s Unflinching Rebuke of Judicial and Law Enforcement Excesses
If Muntaka’s critique was measured, Minister Haruna Iddrisu’s response was unapologetically blunt. Speaking at the funeral of his friend, Dr. Mahama Sayibu, in Tamale, Iddrisu—himself a former Minority Leader and legal practitioner—delivered a searing indictment of the justice system’s abuses.
“In Ghana today, we have seen excesses; excesses from the Police, excesses from the Courts, excesses from EOCO denying persons bail and using bail as punishment for accused persons. That is not law!”
His words were a direct challenge to the legitimacy of the state’s approach to justice. Iddrisu accused police, courts, and the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) of denying bail arbitrarily, effectively punishing the innocent before trial. He emphasized that such practices undermined the rule of law and eroded public confidence in institutions meant to uphold justice.
What made his remarks even more significant was his call for accountability. He urged authorities to respect human rights, ensure fairness in bail determinations, and uphold the principle of equality before the law, regardless of political affiliation or social status.
Why the Silence? The NDC’s Dilemma
Three weeks after these interventions, the NDC has remained conspicuously silent. This absence of response raises critical questions:
Does the NDC agree with the criticisms?
If the party leadership has no objections to the abuse of remand and bail procedures, their silence could be interpreted as endorsement of the very practices the ministers condemned. Alternatively, it may reflect internal divisions, where some factions within the party recognize the legitimacy of the concerns but lack the courage to address them publicly.Why did it take this long for these ministers to speak out?
Both Muntaka and Iddrisu hold high-profile positions, yet their critiques came after months—if not years—of alleged abuses. This delay suggests that either:- They waited for the right moment to avoid political backlash.
- They believed systemic change required external pressure before they could intervene.
Their concerns were suppressed by party directives until they could no longer remain silent.
Is this a coordinated effort, or a coincidence?
The synchronized timing of their statements—both delivered on May 28, 2026—raises the possibility of strategic alignment. Were they acting in unison to amplify their message, or did their individual frustrations converge at the same moment? Either way, their boldness in breaking ranks deserves recognition.
The Broader Implications: Justice, Power, and Accountability
The ministers’ interventions touch on fundamental questions of governance and justice:
Can a Minister intervene in matters under their jurisdiction?
Muntaka’s criticism of police and judicial overreach—while technically under his purview—highlights a tension between institutional loyalty and moral responsibility. If a minister believes his ministry is abusing its authority, does he have a duty to publicly challenge it, even at the risk of political fallout?Is the President’s role in justice delivery being undermined?
The executive’s influence over law enforcement and the judiciary is a contentious issue in Ghana. While the separation of powers theoretically limits presidential intervention, historical precedents—such as President John Mahama’s 2025 veto of efforts to abolish the Office of the Special Prosecutor—suggest that when he chooses, the president can and does intervene in matters of justice.
If the two ministers have privately raised their concerns with the president, but received no response, their public statements may be a last resort. Alternatively, if the president has already taken action behind the scenes, their silence could be a strategic move to avoid unnecessary confrontation.
- What does this say about Ghana’s justice system?
The prolonged detention of suspects without trial, the arbitrary denial of bail, and the use of legal processes as political tools are not isolated incidents but systemic patterns. The fact that two NDC ministers—both lawyers—have publicly condemned these practices suggests that the abuses are not partisan but institutional.
If unchecked, such practices corrode public trust, making it increasingly difficult for citizens to believe that the law applies equally to all. The erosion of confidence in the judiciary has far-reaching consequences, from increased crime (as offenders see no consequences) to political instability (as citizens lose faith in the state’s ability to govern justly).
A Call for Accountability and Reform
The lack of response from the NDC is not merely a political oversight—it is a failure of leadership. If the party’s ministers are willing to speak out, yet the leadership remains silent, it raises questions about whether the NDC is truly committed to justice reform or if it is more concerned with maintaining power than upholding the law.
What is clear is that Muntaka and Iddrisu have performed a public service by exposing these abuses. Their courage in breaking ranks—especially in a party-dominated political environment—should be recognized and rewarded. If Ghana’s justice system is to regain its credibility, meaningful reforms must follow, and those responsible for abuses must be held accountable.
The silence of the NDC in the aftermath of these statements is not an option. Whether through internal party discussions, presidential intervention, or legislative action, the time for change is now. The ministers’ critiques were not mere political posturing but legitimate concerns that demand urgent attention.
In the end, history will judge whether their dissent was a fleeting moment of conscience or the catalyst for a much-needed transformation in Ghana’s justice system. For now, their unflinching stand remains one of the most courageous acts by any NDC officials in recent memory—and one that every Ghanaian should commend.
