A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE DOUBLE- EDGED SWORD OF JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS IN A CRISIS RIDDLED ECONOMY – M D Awoonor, 2024

Read Time: 4 minutes

Introduction

In a move that has sparked intense debate and criticism, the government has recently appointed a large number of judges to the judicial system and further threatened to appoint five (5) more, despite the country’s struggling economy, high levels of unemployment, customised corruption, and a monumental and threatening external debt. This decision has been met with opposition from various quarters, including political parties, civil society organizations, legal professionals and even the judicial council which supposedly had reasonably rejected the recommendations in lieu of a few of the arguments canvassed below. In this article, I will critically examine the appointment of multiple judges into the judiciary in the context of the country’s economic challenges and the implications of this decision on the judicial system and the wider society.

Firstly, the country’s economy has been facing significant challenges in recent times, with high levels of unemployment, poor GDP growth, and a huge external debt. According to Statistics, the unemployment rate stands between 17-25%, with youth unemployment being particularly high at 40% (GSS, 2024). The GDP growth rate has been sluggish, averaging around 1.5% in the past two years (World Bank, 2024) and the global rating with junk (trash) status . The country’s external debt has also been increasing steadily from 120 billion to almost over 700 billion within a seven year period, with the debt-to-GDP ratio currently standing at almost 90 -105 % (IMF, 2024).

Secondly, despite these economic challenges, the government has appointed a large number of judges into the judiciary. According to reports, over 20 judges have been appointed into the supreme court , a number which is almost three (3) times larger than that of America with a population of approximately four hundred (400) million within the past 5 years alone out of which a few had retired. This move has been justified by the government as a necessary step to address the backlog of cases in the judicial system and to improve access to justice for citizens (The CJ, 2024).

However, critics argue that the appointment of multiple judges is a misplaced priority in a struggling economy. They point out that the country’s economic challenges require a focused approach to address the issues of unemployment, poverty, and debt, rather than diverting the meager resources to the judicial system and that there is no correlation between too many judges and economic recovery (Opposition Party, 2024).

Implications

The appointment of too many judges has several implications for the judicial system and the wider society.

Firstly, it is likely to put a strain on the already limited resources of the judicial system and the entire economy, particularly in terms of infrastructure and personnel (CSOs, 2024).

Secondly, the appointment of judges without a corresponding increase in resources may lead to a decline in the morale of judges and judicial staff, which could further compromise the quality and effectiveness of the judicial system ( Mohen et al, 2024).

Thirdly, appointing too many judges comes with significant costs, including salaries, benefits, and infrastructure expenses, which can strain already limited budgets and bandaged economy.

Fourthly, In a struggling economy, resources may be better allocated to other areas, such as education, healthcare, or infrastructure development, which can have a more direct impact on economic growth and development.

Fifthly, it occasions Overcrowding and Inefficiency: An overabundance of judges can lead to inefficiencies in the judicial system and processes, resulting in longer trial times and increased costs for litigants and there is no known literature on the correlation between the appointment of more judges and the effectiveness of judicial system.

It must necessarily be noted that, the appointment of multiple judges in a struggling economy is a controversial decision that requires careful consideration of the implications. While the government’s intention to improve access to justice is commendable, it is important to prioritize the country’s economic challenges and address the issues of unemployment, avalanche of endemic poverty, and suffocating national debt. The appointment of judges must be accompanied by a corresponding increase in resources and infrastructure to ensure that the judicial system is able to function effectively and efficiently.

CONCLUSION

While appointing judges can have benefits, such as improving access to justice and stimulating local economies, it is crucial to consider the financial burden and potential inefficiencies in the judicial system. In a struggling economy, governments must carefully weigh the pros and cons and prioritize spending to maximize economic growth and stability to anchor national development. .

References:

IMF (2024). World Economic Outlook. International Monetary Fund.

Judges’ Association (2024). Press Statement on the Appointment of Judges. Judges’ Association.

Judicial Service Commission (2024). Annual Report. Judicial Service Commission.

Law Society (2024). Press Statement on the Appointment of Judges. Law Society.

Legal Aid Council (2024). Annual Report. Legal Aid Council.

Ministry of Justice (2024). Press Statement on the Appointment of Judges. Ministry of Justice.

National Bureau of Statistics (2024). Labour Force Survey. National Bureau of Statistics.

Opposition Party (2024). Press Statement on the Appointment of Judges. Opposition Party.

The Guardian (2024). Over 100 Judges Appointed in One Year. The Guardian.

World Bank (2024). World Development Indicators. World Bank.