Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr Justice Edem Srem-Sai, has launched a sharp critique of the Ghana Bar Association’s leadership, accusing it of selective criticism and questioning its independence in responding to comments made by Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie.
Speaking in an interview on Joy FM’s Top Story on Monday, September 14, Dr Srem-Sai said an organisation’s independence should be demonstrated through its actions and conduct rather than simply being assumed or claimed.
“Independence is not a presumed conference,” he said, explaining that for an organisation or institution to be regarded as independent, there must be tangible evidence of that independence.
He said the same principle applied to consistency, arguing that an organisation which describes itself as consistent must demonstrate that quality through its conduct and decisions.
“The point that we made at the conference is that when it comes to independence and when it comes to consistency, the leadership of the Ghana Bar Association leaves much to be desired,” Dr Srem-Sai said.
The Chief Justice Controversy
His comments follow criticism by GBA President Efua Ghartey of remarks made by Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie during a visit to the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF) on September 2.
During the visit, the Chief Justice praised MIIF and other public institutions under the current administration, saying some of the developments he had witnessed had left him wondering what Ghana had been doing over the previous eight years .
At SSNIT the same day, he referenced past attempts to sell prized assets like the Labadi Beach Hotel, saying “you wonder how Ghana could have sunk so low” .
Mrs Ghartey subsequently described the Chief Justice’s comments as inappropriate while speaking at the Ghana Bar Association Conference 2026/27 in Ada on Monday. She said the remarks “left much to be desired” and cautioned that judicial officers must “stay within their bounds” under the Constitution .
“We do not want to believe that what happened is a fulfilment of Matthew 12:34, which says, ‘out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh’,” she said. “Respectfully, the Judicial Secretary’s attempted defence of the Chief Justice was at best lacklustre” .
The Consistency Argument
Dr Srem-Sai said, however, that the main issue under discussion was not whether the Chief Justice’s remarks were political, but whether the GBA had applied its own standards consistently in responding to similar comments from judicial officers.
“I don’t think the issue that was up for discussion today was about the Chief Justice’s speech; it’s about the Ghana Bar Association’s response to the speech that the Chief Justice gave,” he said.
According to him, the association has not demonstrated consistency in how it responds to public comments made by Chief Justices.
“If the Ghana Bar Association is of the view that Chief Justices should not make comments that are seen as political, then anytime a Chief Justice or any judge makes such a comment, then the Ghana Bar Association should condemn it. But to condemn some and not condemn others, that is where the issue is,” he said .
He argued that the Bar could either remain silent on such matters or consistently speak out against them, but should not selectively condemn comments based on the political circumstances surrounding them.
“So, our point is that if you decide to be quiet, then be prepared throughout. If you decide to talk, then talk throughout,” he said.
Allegations of Political Alignment
Dr Srem-Sai further accused the Bar of allowing political considerations to determine when it criticises judicial officers.
“And then when you choose to talk when a particular comment favours your favourite, or you speak out when the particular comment is against your favourite, or it favours your opponent, then you are not being consistent,” he said .
Asked whether he believed the GBA was politically aligned with the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP), Dr Srem-Sai did not directly confirm the allegation but acknowledged that such a perception exists.
“We hope they are not. It is our prayer that they are truly not,” he said.
He maintained that the association’s perceived selective approach to criticism had fuelled doubts about its political neutrality, arguing that its interventions appeared to correspond with the interests of one side of the political divide.
“The point we are making is that the perception or the reality seems to persist. They pick and choose as and when they want to criticise. All their picking and choosing seem to align to a particular political party’s interests. That’s the issue,” he said.
Dr Srem-Sai also cited comments from the parliamentary Minority in support of the GBA as further evidence of what he described as an alleged connection between the association and the NPP.
“The very fact that they are even comparing the Chief Justice with the Ghana Bar Association and accusing the Chief Justice of being an NDC Chief Justice is an admission that they are aligned somehow with the Ghana Bar Association. And that settles the matter,” he stated.
A Broader Pattern of Tension
The exchange marks the latest in a series of confrontations between the Attorney-General’s office and the GBA.
In August 2026, Dr Srem-Sai issued a statement rebutting GBA claims regarding a directive by the Chief Justice for some cases to continue during legal vacation, saying the claims were not “supported by law, rules, practice, or optimal reason” .
Majority Chief Whip Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor also weighed in, accusing the GBA of becoming a “ventilating association for the opposition party” and alleging that its interventions often mirror NPP positions .
Meanwhile, the Attorney-General’s office has announced plans to introduce a Legal Practitioners’ Standards Board Bill, a move that would overhaul the framework for lawyers’ discipline and professional standards .
Dr Srem-Sai maintained that the controversy should not centre solely on whether Justice Baffoe-Bonnie’s remarks were political. Rather, he said, the focus should be on whether the GBA is applying its principles independently, consistently and without selectivity.
“It is no surprise that the general public consistently views the Ghana Bar Association as not aligned to the general good of the country or aligned to the public good as a whole, but rather aligned to a particular section of the political divide,” he said .
