Former Foreign Affairs Minister Hanna Tetteh has questioned the extent to which public opinion influences the decisions of Ghana's Supreme Court, particularly in high-stakes political cases.

In a recent Facebook post, she reflected on whether the Court considers the broader societal context when delivering rulings, such as its recent ex-parte decision that challenged the Speaker of Parliament’s declaration of vacant seats.

Tetteh acknowledged the judiciary’s vital role in upholding the law impartially, yet she suggested that judicial decisions do not exist in isolation.

She highlighted that the Court operates within the larger framework of Ghanaian society, which encompasses not only the parties directly involved but also key stakeholders like businesses, investors, unions, religious leaders, civil society, and the general public.

“Do they listen to public commentary and reflect on the implications of their decisions and how these are received by the wider society?” she asks, noting that while the court’s primary responsibility is to uphold the law, the broader social, economic, and political environment cannot be ignored.

Hanna Tetteh notes that as Ghana nears another election cycle, the political climate is becoming increasingly volatile, raising the stakes for maintaining peace and security.

In her view, this highly partisan atmosphere makes the judiciary's role even more critical.

She emphasises that the Court's rulings can impact not only legal outcomes but also the broader balance of power and stability in the country.

Tetteh contends that while the judiciary must maintain its independence and resist external pressures, its decisions inevitably carry significant implications for society as a whole.

“In these fragile times, we need a judiciary that understands its pivotal role in ensuring not only that the laws are applied justly, but that democracy not only survives but thrives,” she concludes.

When the Justices of the Supreme Court take their decisions or make orders in whatever circumstances, not just in the context of the recent ex-parte decision against the Speaker’s ruling, do they listen to the public commentary and reflect on their decision, its implications and how it has been received not only by the parties to the particular suit or in a case with political undertones the legal profession, the businesses/investor community, the diplomatic community, religious actors, the unions, civil society and other key social actors?.