- Parliament postpones vetting of Justice Kweku T. Ackaah-Boafo following a misconduct petition
- Petitioner accuses the judge of bias, insults, and cultural insensitivity
- Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s supporters deny allegations, calling them unfounded
The vetting process for President John Mahama’s Supreme Court nominee, Justice Kweku T. Ackaah-Boafo, has taken an unexpected turn as Parliament indefinitely postponed his hearing.
The delay stems from a last-minute petition submitted to the Appointments Committee, accusing the Court of Appeal judge of judicial bias and misconduct. The petition, now referred to Speaker Alban Bagbin for urgent consideration, puts Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s nomination on hold.
The complaint was filed by Anthony Kwabenya Rau, who identifies as an international human rights activist. He alleges that Justice Ackaah-Boafo displayed extreme bias and used derogatory language during court proceedings at the DVLA court, referring to him as a “so-called ‘Messiah’ international human rights activist” and questioning his legal standing in Ghana.
Rau also claims the judge’s written ruling contained personal attacks, which he says reflect deep-seated bias and abuse of authority. In his petition, he described the nominee as “arrogant, biased, power-drunk, and supportive of corruption,” warning that Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s appointment to the Supreme Court would be detrimental to Ghana’s national and international image.
Additional concerns were raised about the judge’s cultural sensitivity, citing his Canadian background and alleged disrespect toward the 67-year-old petitioner—behavior Rau believes violates traditional norms regarding age and respect.
The petitioner also referenced a previous case involving the New Patriotic Party (NPP), alleging that Justice Ackaah-Boafo declined to approve interest payments shortly before being promoted to the Court of Appeal under President Akufo-Addo’s administration.
Sources close to Justice Ackaah-Boafo have dismissed the allegations as baseless, affirming that the judge remains calm and prepared to appear before the committee when proceedings resume.
These developments stand in stark contrast to recent praise for Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s professionalism and integrity. However, under Parliament’s Standing Orders (Order 99), the Appointments Committee must investigate the petition within 30 days to determine its merit.
The Speaker’s response is expected to heavily influence the next steps, bringing renewed scrutiny to the balance between judicial accountability and independence in high-level judicial appointments.
As the process stalls, the fate of Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s nomination—and possibly future Supreme Court vettings—remains uncertain.
