Afenyo-Markin's attack on Circuit Court judge reprehensible, disappointing and shameful – Brako-Powers

Legal practitioner and governance expert Austin Kwabena Brako-Powers has strongly criticised remarks made by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin regarding a Circuit Court judge who denied bail to New Patriotic Party (NPP) member Abronye DC.

Mr Brako-Powers described the comments as “reprehensible, disappointing, and shameful,” warning that such public statements risk undermining confidence in the judiciary and weakening respect for judicial independence.

The controversy stems from proceedings at Circuit Court 9 in Accra, where Abronye DC was arraigned on charges under Sections 207 and 208 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29). The presiding judge denied bail at that stage of the proceedings, a decision that has since triggered political debate and public commentary.

According to Mr Brako-Powers, bail is not an automatic entitlement but a discretionary decision made by the courts based on legal criteria. These include the nature of the offence, the likelihood of the accused attending trial, the risk of reoffending, and the overall interests of justice.

He cited Section 96(5) of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30), explaining that judges are empowered to grant or refuse bail depending on the circumstances of each case.

“Bail is discretionary. It is not a constitutional right in the unqualified sense that many people — including, apparently, some politicians — seem to believe,” he stated.

He further pointed out that Ghana’s judicial system provides mechanisms for review, noting that the Accra High Court later granted Abronye DC bail in the sum of GH¢100,000 with two sureties, illustrating what he described as a layered justice system with internal checks.

While acknowledging that judicial decisions are open to scrutiny and public debate, Mr Brako-Powers stressed that criticism must remain professional and grounded in legal reasoning rather than personal attacks.

“Judges are not above criticism. Judicial decisions must be open to scrutiny… but when politicians attack judges for decisions they dislike, they weaken the institutional architecture on which those rights depend,” he explained.

He argued that such conduct by political actors risks eroding public trust in the justice system and undermining the independence of judicial officers.

The governance expert further urged restraint in political discourse, stating that disagreements with court rulings should be pursued through proper legal channels rather than through public statements targeting individual judges.

Mr Brako-Powers also referenced constitutional protections for free speech under Article 21(1)(a) of the 1992 Constitution, noting that while freedom of expression is fundamental, it must be exercised responsibly and within the bounds of respect for judicial authority.

He emphasised that free speech in Ghana is a constitutional right, not a privilege granted by the state, and is essential for accountability and democratic governance.

However, he cautioned that concerns raised by opposition figures, including claims of the politicisation or weaponisation of state institutions, should not be dismissed outright, describing them as part of a broader and ongoing democratic discussion.

According to him, allegations of institutional bias are not new in Ghana’s political landscape and have surfaced under different administrations, including between 2017 and 2024, reflecting recurring tensions between political actors and state institutions.