He made the remark on Monday, June 16, 2025, during his vetting by Parliament’s Appointments Committee.

Responding to a question about how he would handle matters related to LGBTQ+ rights in court, given his active role in the Catholic Church, Justice Adjei said judges are bound by their oath to remain impartial.

“When we talk about our faiths, whether Christian, Muslim, or any other, it is a personal matter,” he said. “But when you are in the courtroom, you have taken an oath to be impartial, regardless of who appears before you. Once I put on my judicial cap, I must act according to that oath.”

He said his current role as a judge at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights involves handling sensitive cases, including those related to sexual orientation, and added that he always applies the law without religious influence.

“If any matter comes before me, whether it concerns same-sex issues or something else, I will consider the facts and apply the law. My faith will not influence the outcome,” he said. “Anything else would be a failure to discharge my duty as a judge.”

Justice Adjei cautioned that allowing religious beliefs to shape court decisions could undermine the legal system.

“If faith were to guide judgments, then each religious group might want someone on the bench to speak for their interest. That should not be the case,” he stated.

ALSO READ:

• I’d rather lose my life than accept LGBTQ+ practices in Ghana – Speaker Bagbin

• Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill: Mahama cannot simply walk away – Assin South MP

He argued that the mandatory death sentence undermines the fundamental right to life and places Ghana in violation of its international human rights obligations.

Appearing before the Appointments Committee on Monday, he advocated for judicial discretion in capital cases, allowing judges to impose alternative sentences where appropriate.

“I agree that the mandatory imposition of the death sentence is wrong. If a person goes to court and is to be convicted and suffer death, first and foremost, we must respect life. The judge who heard the matter should have the discretion—either to give several years or impose the death sentence,” he stated.

He referenced offences such as treason, high treason, and specific sections of the Armed Forces Act (Act 105), which currently mandate the death penalty upon conviction.

Justice Adjei emphasised that this rigid stance contradicts Ghana’s commitments under Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which affirms the sanctity of life.

“Ghana is a signatory to the African Charter, and Article 4 provides that you must respect life,” he noted.

“The African Court has variously held that any decision by any country that does not give a judge discretion in the imposition of the death sentence is in violation of Article 4.”

Reflecting on his tenure at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Justice Adjei cited landmark rulings against countries like Tanzania and Benin, where mandatory death penalties were found to violate human rights law.

He warned that Ghana could face similar legal setbacks if reforms are not implemented.

“If cases from Ghana happen to go before the court, we are going to face the same fate. We are going to lose,” he cautioned.

ALSO READ:

• Something must kill a man; death penalty was no punishment – NPP guru

• I’m not happy about the removal of death penalty – NDC MP