Justice Ackaah-Boafo: Appointments Committee explains why it dismissed petition against Supreme Court nominee

The Chairman of Parliament’s Appointments Committee, Bernard Ahiafor, has dismissed a petition lodged against Supreme Court nominee Justice Kwaku Tawiah Ackaah-Boafo, describing it as “frivolous, vexatious, worthless, unmeritorious, and a complete abuse of the process.”

The petition, submitted by activist Anthony Kwabenya Rau, alleged that Justice Ackaah-Boafo had insulted him during court proceedings in a 2019 case involving Adolf Xavier Ghana Limited and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA), reportedly labelling him “arrogant” and “power drunk.” The nominee has denied the claims.

Justice Ackaah-Boafo appeared before the Committee on Friday, June 20, 2025, after the petition caused a brief delay in his vetting. However, in his opening remarks, Chairman Ahiafor stated that the Committee, after a thorough examination of the petition and court judgment, found the allegations legally baseless and lacking merit.

“The allegations contained in the petition—that the judge insulted and attacked the petitioner—are completely unfounded,” Mr Ahiafor said. “Having considered the totality of the evidence and the judgment, the Appointments Committee cannot become a substitute for the Supreme Court or the Judicial Council to review a Court of Appeal ruling or take disciplinary action.”

He clarified that the matter raised in the petition had already been addressed through the appropriate legal channels, with the petitioner having exercised his right of appeal in the DVLA case. Mr Ahiafor also confirmed that additional documents submitted by the petitioner were unrelated to Justice Ackaah-Boafo and concerned a separate corruption complaint against a different judicial officer, Charles Idan.

“The additional documents have no bearing on the current petition and are entirely unrelated to the nominee,” he explained. “We see no justification to admit them as evidence against him.”

The Committee’s ruling was further grounded in Article 127(3) of the 1992 Constitution, which protects judges from lawsuits arising from the discharge of their judicial duties. Citing the constitutional provision, Mr Ahiafor said, “A Justice of the Superior Court or any other person exercising judicial power shall not be liable to any action or suit for any act or omission by him in the exercise of the judicial power.”

He concluded that the complaint targeted judicial conduct and therefore fell outside the Committee’s purview. “The complaint against the nominee is about the exercise of judicial power in conducting the matter leading to the judgment under reference. The Committee this morning ruled that the petition is baseless in law and fact,” he stated.

Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s vetting has since proceeded following the Committee’s decision to dismiss the petition.