The Director of Legal Affairs of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and Chief Executive Officer of the National Petroleum Authority (NPA), Godwin Edudzi Tamakloe, has said public concerns that the revived tribunal system could be used by the government to target political opponents should be dismissed.
He said the new Tribunals Act has removed presidential and political influence from the selection of tribunal members, making it difficult for the Executive to influence the outcome of cases.
Mr Tamakloe made the observation when he appeared as a panellist on TV3’s The Key Points programme on Saturday, August 29, 2026.
“Presidential or political influence is completely eradicated,” he said.
“So the fear that maybe somebody will be on the public tribunal and will do a partisan whatever in terms of adjudication is completely taken away from the Act assented to by the President.”
He explained that under the new law, the President only nominated the chairman of a tribunal, and such a nomination was made on the advice of the Judicial Council.
The other members of the tribunal panel, he said, were appointed by the Chief Justice, also acting on the advice of the Judicial Council.
Mr Tamakloe said the arrangement meant that the President was not involved in selecting the persons who would hear cases before the tribunals.
His comment followed concerns raised by sections of the public and political actors about the possible use of the tribunals for political purposes.
When Parliament passed the bill in July, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) expressed reservations about the legislation in its original form.
The Secretary-General of the TUC, Joshua Ansah, warned that the bill could become “a potent tool for weaponising justice delivery”.
Former Vice-President and NPP flagbearer, Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, also appealed to President John Dramani Mahama not to assent to the bill.
“Ghanaians remember tribunals, and we remember what was done in their name,” Dr Bawumia said.
He called for a national dialogue involving the Ghana Bar Association, civil society organisations, organised labour, political parties and the Judiciary before the bill was assented to.
Dr Bawumia also said the Constitution Review Committee had recommended the removal of Regional Tribunals from the Constitution.
He questioned why Parliament had legislated on the matter before the committee’s report was made public.
Mr Tamakloe, who defended the legislation, said the concerns raised during the passage of the bill had been taken into account in the final law.
He referred to Section 3 of the Act, which, according to him, sets out governing principles requiring tribunals to operate on the basis of efficiency and fair trial, with proceedings guided by the Evidence Act.
“A careful reading of the bill now passed and assented, now an Act of Parliament, I can tell you that all these concerns have been factored in the law,” he said.
Concern
Another panellist, private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu, said although he accepted the tribunal system as a constitutional requirement under Article 143 of the 1992 Constitution, he remained concerned about the provision allowing non-lawyers to serve on tribunal panels.
Mr Kpebu urged the Judicial Council to use its discretion under the Act to give preference to legally qualified persons when appointing members of tribunal panels.
He said he preferred the strengthening of existing state institutions rather than creating additional bodies where existing institutions already performed the same functions.
Mr Kpebu said he had been persuaded about the need for the tribunals, although he still had concerns about the composition of the panels.
Mr Tamakloe also expressed confidence in the role of the Attorney-General, Dr Dominic Ayine, in ensuring that the operation of the tribunal system did not undermine human rights protections.
