Lawyer and National Democratic Congress (NDC) Communication team member, Hamza Suhuyini, has accused the New Patriotic Party (NPP) of hypocrisy over its criticism of the Chief Justice’s recent comments on the performance of some State-owned entreprises.
Speaking on JoyNews’ AM Show on Thursday, September 3, 2026, Mr Suhuyini said the NPP had previously praised the Chief Justice for speaking openly against illegal mining, but was now questioning his neutrality because his latest comments appeared critical of the party’s record in government.
The Chief Justice, during a visit to the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF) on Wednesday, September 2, praised the performance of MIIF and other state institutions.
He said some of the developments he had witnessed had left him wondering what Ghana had been doing over the previous eight years.
“I must congratulate you. I mean, you have done marvellously well. See, because sometimes when we hear the things that you have done, the things that some organisations are doing now, we wonder; some of us keep wondering what really we have been doing in the past eight years,” Justice Baffoe-Bonnie said.
He made the comments after visiting the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT), where he said he had also been impressed by what he was told about the institution’s performance.
Comparing the situation to previous plans to dispose of some SSNIT assets, including Labadi Beach Hotel, the Chief Justice said: “If you compare that to the fact that not too long ago, SSNIT was preparing to sell its prized assets like Labadi Beach Hotel, you wonder how Ghana could have sunk so low.”
Mr Suhuyini said the Chief Justice had consistently demonstrated a willingness to speak on issues of national interest and that his right to express such views should not be questioned simply because political actors disagree with him.
“This is not the first time the Chief Justice is speaking. Every Chief Justice and his style, you cannot take away that right from the Chief Justice.”
He recalled the Chief Justice’s earlier interventions on illegal mining, popularly known as galamsey, arguing that the NPP had at the time welcomed his comments and used them to criticise the government.
“It was this same group of people, NPP, who not long ago were in town praising the Chief Justice, the same Chief Justice, on his open statements on the fight against galamsey,” he said.
According to Mr Suhuyini, the Chief Justice’s comments on galamsey had previously been presented by NPP figures as evidence that the government was failing to deal adequately with the environmental and economic consequences of illegal mining.
He specifically cited NPP Communications Director Richard Ahiagbah, whom he said had praised the Chief Justice’s intervention and described it as a bold statement.
Mr Suhuyini argued that the NPP had also repeatedly referred to the Chief Justice’s position on galamsey in Parliament without questioning whether he was exceeding his mandate or breaching ethical obligations.
“When he said that the situation had worsened, then you did not know that he had ethical requirements as a Chief Justice,” he said.
He consequently accused the party of applying different standards to the Chief Justice depending on whether his comments supported its political position.
“What kind of hypocrisy is the NPP engaging in?” he asked. “All of a sudden, because today, that statement is against you, the Chief Justice has become partisan.”
Mr Suhuyini also challenged critics of the Chief Justice to identify the specific law or ethical principle they believed he had breached.
“What is wrong with what the Chief Justice is doing? Which law is the Chief Justice breaking? Which ethical underpinning can you point to that the Chief Justice is breaking?” he asked.
He maintained that the Chief Justice’s engagement with institutions outside the judiciary was not inherently improper, arguing that the office required its occupant to build relationships and promote cooperation among state institutions.
He pointed to the Chief Justice’s engagements with institutions including the National Petroleum Authority, saying these reflected an attempt to understand the operations of public institutions and foster collaboration.
Mr Suhuyini further argued that the Chief Justice was expressing an opinion on the state of governance rather than making a judicial determination or acting as a political actor.
He said the substance of the Chief Justice’s assessment could also be considered against Ghana’s economic difficulties in recent years, including the country’s loss of access to international capital markets and the implementation of the Domestic Debt Exchange Programme (DDEP).
“Is it not the fact that eight years ago this country was run down? If this country was not run down, why is it that we were locked out of the capital market?” he asked.
He added that ordinary Ghanaians and pensioners had been required to make significant sacrifices through the debt restructuring exercise.
“If this country was not run down, how come the Ghanaians have to sacrifice their meagre savings under the guise of a domestic debt exchange programme? Even our pensioners,” he said.
The NDC communicator also cited the previous financial challenges of state-owned enterprises such as the Tema Oil Refinery (TOR), questioning whether the situation at such institutions could not legitimately be compared with their current performance.
“Is it not a fact that institutions like TOR were run at a loss? Is that the story today? So what has the Chief Justice said that is not true?” he asked.
Also read:
