Sophia Akuffo Council Appointment Deemed Unconstitutional

Sophia Akuffo’s Council of State Appointment: A Constitutional Misstep

The appointment of former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo to Ghana’s Council of State has reignited a critical debate about constitutional adherence and the principle of seniority in national governance. According to Kwaku Ansa-Asare, Dean of the Faculty of Laws at Mountcrest University College, this appointment was not merely questionable but fundamentally flawed from its inception, violating a clear constitutional directive that prioritizes seniority over novelty.

At the heart of the controversy lies Article 89 of the 1992 Ghana Constitution, which stipulates that the Council of State must include the most senior retired Chief Justice. At the time of Akuffo’s appointment, that distinction belonged to Georgina Theodora Wood, who had served ten years as Chief Justice — a decade longer than Akuffo’s tenure. Ansa-Asare contends that bypassing Wood in favor of Akuffo undermines the constitutional hierarchy and erodes public trust in institutional integrity. “The legal profession drives on seniority,” he emphasized. “In bypassing, you create a problem.”

This procedural misstep was compounded by the government’s handling of Akuffo’s subsequent resignation. She submitted her resignation in September 2025, yet the administration delayed public acknowledgment until media leaks forced its hand. Ansa-Asare condemns this as a “half-truth” that betrays the transparency expected of public office. “A person resigning in September and the government coming out under public pressure to make some half-truth — it should be roundly condemned,” he asserted. “The next time something like this happens, the government must come clean and let the whole country know.”

Beyond the procedural objections, Akuffo’s conduct while in office further complicated her position. Her testimony before the Article 146 committee defending then-Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo — which she characterized as a “treason trial” — raised eyebrows and questioned her adherence to the oath of secrecy. Ansa-Asare suggests that such actions likely rendered her role untenable, making her resignation a logical, if belated, outcome.

The timing of these events coincides with other significant departures within Ghana’s governance structures. Earlier this week, the Electoral Commission saw Deputy Chairperson Dr. Bossman Asare resign to return to academia, while Deputy Chairperson Samuel Tettey retired. These concurrent exits underscore a period of institutional transition, yet they do not alleviate the constitutional concern raised by Akuffo’s appointment.

This perspective echoes Ansa-Asare’s earlier commentary on constitutional fairness, where he argued that the Ofori-Atta saga “was not fair, infringed on his dignity” (/ofori-atta-saga-was-not-fair-infringed-on-his-dignity-ansa-asare). Both interventions underscore a consistent advocacy for adherence to constitutional principles and institutional propriety, even when doing so challenges prevailing political narratives.

As Ghana continues to navigate complex governance challenges, the Akuffo episode serves as a reminder that constitutional provisions are not mere guidelines but binding commitments. Upholding the seniority principle in Council of State appointments is not about honoring individuals alone; it is about preserving the predictability and legitimacy of Ghana’s democratic institutions. The Council of State, designed as a body of experienced nationals to advise the President, loses its moral authority when appointments appear to sidestep established norms. Until such principles are consistently observed, questions about the fairness and legitimacy of state appointments will persist, potentially undermining public confidence in the very institutions meant to safeguard national interests.

Image Source: MYJOYONLINE