Edudzi Drops Bombshell —Appointing Judges Is Bigger Than Becoming President

National Petroleum Authority CEO Godwin Edudzi Tameklo has highlighted the lasting impact of judicial appointments, saying a President’s decision to choose judges could be more consequential than many of the physical development projects undertaken during an administration.

He said appointing judges should be regarded as a major constitutional responsibility rather than simply another government duty. In his assessment, the individuals selected for the bench can influence Ghana’s affairs long after the appointing President has completed their time in office.

Tameklo, a legal practitioner and Director of Legal Affairs for the National Democratic Congress, made the comments in the midst of discussions concerning the judiciary and the office of the Chief Justice.

He explained that the difference between judges and political officeholders makes judicial appointments particularly important. While ministers and MPs generally remain in office for four years and Presidents are constitutionally restricted to two four-year terms, judges may serve for 20 or even 30 years.

As a result, a judge appointed by one administration can continue issuing decisions under several subsequent governments. Those decisions may affect citizens who were not even adults when the appointment was made.

Tameklo said the authority of the courts extends into areas that can directly affect people’s lives and property. Judicial decisions can determine the future of businesses, decide whether a person remains incarcerated or is released, and settle disputes over ownership of land.

He also emphasised the role courts can play in political disputes. When an election result is challenged before the judiciary, a court ruling may ultimately determine who has the constitutional right to occupy the presidency.

Because of the enormous powers attached to judicial office, Tameklo said the Constitution deliberately places several requirements around the appointment of judges. The President must consult relevant constitutional bodies, including the Judicial Council and Council of State, and nominees must receive approval from Parliament.

He further cited Article 146, which establishes procedures for dealing with the removal of the Chief Justice and other superior court judges. According to him, these safeguards are important because they reduce the possibility of political influence being used to interfere with the independence of the judiciary.

Tameklo has previously argued that judges must be protected from arbitrary dismissal by people in government. He warned that if judicial officers could easily be removed by political authorities, they might struggle to make independent decisions.

Such a situation, he said, would ultimately hurt ordinary citizens who depend on the courts to defend their rights and provide justice.

The NPA boss stressed that political administrations are temporary. Presidents eventually leave office, and the roads, buildings and other projects associated with their governments may eventually lose their political significance.

Judicial appointments are different because the judges can remain active for decades. Their interpretations of the law, constitutional decisions and rulings on important disputes can continue influencing the country long after the administration that appointed them has gone.

Tameklo therefore believes that Presidents must exercise exceptional care when selecting judges, considering that the effects of those choices can extend across multiple administrations and generations.