Afenyo-Markin clashes with Mahama Ayariga during vetting of Supreme Court nominees

Parliament witnessed heated exchanges on Monday as Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin and Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga clashed during the vetting of seven Supreme Court nominees put forward by President John Mahama.

The confrontation reflected growing tensions between the opposition and the ruling government, particularly over recent judicial developments and the state of constitutional governance in Ghana.

The Parliamentary Appointments Committee convened to begin the vetting process for the President’s latest batch of Supreme Court nominees—an unprecedented number in a single round—sparking political controversy from the outset.

The move comes amid heightened political scrutiny of the judiciary following the recent suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, a development that has triggered sharp reactions across the political spectrum.

During the proceedings, Minority Leader Afenyo-Markin delivered a stinging critique, questioning the integrity and timing of the vetting process.

He alleged that the Mahama-led administration was engaging in double standards, citing the National Democratic Congress’s (NDC) vehement opposition in 2024 to then-President Nana Akufo-Addo’s nomination of two justices during his final months in office.

“This government cannot in one breath criticize Akufo-Addo’s appointments as illegitimate and, in another, push through seven nominations with alarming urgency,” Afenyo-Markin argued.

He also took aim at what he described as an “orchestrated” move to remove Chief Justice Torkornoo, asserting that the Supreme Court had failed in its constitutional duty to safeguard judicial independence by not intervening in what he called politically motivated investigations.

In response, Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga dismissed Afenyo-Markin’s accusations as unfounded and misleading.

He insisted that the ongoing probe into the Chief Justice was grounded in due process and constitutional procedure.

According to Ayariga, the vetting of the new nominees was both necessary and legitimate, citing the need to fill critical vacancies and maintain the judiciary’s operational efficiency.

This face-off between the two parliamentary leaders underscores a deepening political divide over the judiciary’s role and the executive’s influence over it.

The probe into Chief Justice Torkornoo—reportedly based on allegations of judicial overreach and conduct unbecoming—has already drawn criticism from legal professionals, civil society, and opposition parties, who view the suspension as a threat to the independence of the judiciary.