Ransford Edward Van Gyampo, a Professor of Political Science at the University of Ghana has advised the Judiciary to consider the sentiments of the masses in applying the laws in order not to become “a regime of robots.”
According to him, although the application of the law is paramount in dealing with judicial matters, the feelings of the people cannot be entirely overlooked considering the fact that these laws were made for the people and should be interpreted to reflect their demands at any point in time.
The Professor of Political Science was speaking on the scheduling of cases by the Supreme Court which became debatable between the Executive and Legislature after the Chief Justice called for hearing of a case which potentially serves the interest of the Executive ahead of that of the Legislature despite the Attorney-General writing for an expedited trial.
Speaking on the KeyPoints on TV3 Saturday, March 30, 2024, Prof. Gyampo said “we are not saying that let that (public sentiments) overly sway you but you should find a certain nice balance between the application of law in a manner that respects the feelings and sensibilities of the people.”
“So, rigid application of laws without thinking about public mood and sensibilities is a threat to judicial independence and also ushers people sitting as judges into a regime of robots. We must be able to apply the laws, respect the judicial processes but in doing so, I call on judges to also be mindful of the perception that they are building about themselves,” he indicated.
He lauded the role of the Supreme Court in keeping Ghanaians together in its determination of the 2012 election petition hearing, reminding the courts of their “responsibility to offer judgement that respects the mood and sensibilities of the people” to erode the negative perception people have against them.
Professor Gyampo explained further that, concentrating solely on the law, after diminishing the public trust in the Judiciary will become an affront to the nation’s democracy.
“If they decide not to care about what the public say and concentrate solely on the law, then your conduct itself will remain an affront to the quest to shore up judicial independence because it will be in the psyche of people that you’re biased” adding that the more people think you’re biased, the more it affects judicial independence.
He counseled the judges to “deliberately be seen to be doing things to address these kinds of bias that people will have about them.”
