Ghana's justice system choked by frivolous appeals, says former Chief Justice Akuffo

Ghana's judicial system is being strangled by a growing tide of unnecessary appeals that should never reach the Supreme Court, according to former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo. Speaking this week, she has called for urgent reforms to tighten the criteria governing which cases can proceed to the apex court, a move she argues could significantly accelerate justice delivery across the country.

The crux of Akuffo's concern centres on interlocutory appeals—applications relating to procedural or intermediate matters that arise during ongoing cases, rather than the substantive disputes themselves. Currently, litigants can escalate these preliminary issues to the Supreme Court, a practice that Akuffo describes as both unnecessary and counterproductive. "Sometimes there are matters which come to the Supreme Court only on what is called an interlocutory appeal, which is so unnecessary and shouldn't have come to the Supreme Court because the case itself might still be in the High Court," she explained during an appearance on Channel One TV.

The problem is not merely procedural inefficiency; it has real consequences for citizens awaiting justice. Cases involving interlocutory appeals can languish before the Supreme Court for years, meaning that the actual substantive disputes—which are often still being heard at the High Court level—remain unresolved. This creates a peculiar gridlock where the lower court cannot proceed effectively until the Supreme Court rules on intermediate issues, prolonging the agony of litigants and clogging the entire system.

The case for reform

Akuffo's proposal is straightforward but potentially transformative: the Supreme Court should primarily focus on cases that establish new legal principles or involve fundamental constitutional questions. Routine appeals and matters that do not break fresh legal ground should be resolved at the Court of Appeal, Ghana's second-highest court. This would create a more rational distribution of judicial labour and allow each court to focus on cases appropriate to its level.

"A lot of other matters should end in the Court of Appeal if they don't raise new issues or very sensitive constitutional issues," the former Chief Justice argued. Her recommendation reflects international best practice; apex courts worldwide typically concentrate on cases of public importance and legal significance rather than serving as general appellate forums for routine disputes.

Why it matters for Ghana

Ghana's judiciary faces an existential challenge: public confidence depends partly on the speed with which justice is delivered. When cases drag on for years—sometimes a decade or more—the entire institution suffers reputational damage, regardless of the quality of final judgments. Citizens lose faith in the system, businesses struggle to plan investments, and the rule of law itself becomes suspect.

The backlog at Ghana's courts is not a secret. High Court dockets are overwhelmed, and the Supreme Court's limited capacity is stretched further by cases that arguably do not belong there. Akuffo's intervention, coming from someone who led the judiciary for several years, carries weight and credibility. It is unlikely to be dismissed as academic theorising; it represents the perspective of someone who intimately understands the system's constraints.

Reform of appellate jurisdiction is politically feasible but requires legislative action or constitutional amendment, depending on the changes proposed. The judiciary itself may resist, as courts often view expanded jurisdiction as a sign of importance. However, Akuffo's call reflects growing consensus among legal practitioners and judicial reformers that the current system is unsustainable.

If Ghana is serious about improving its investment climate, reducing corruption cases' timelines, and restoring public trust in institutions, addressing the appeal bottleneck should rank high on the agenda. The former Chief Justice has sounded the alarm; whether policymakers and lawmakers listen remains to be seen.