The Supreme Court of Ghana is the final court in the land. It is not just the highest appellate body — it is the guardian of the 1992 Constitution, with the power to strike down laws, restrain the executive, and determine the outcome of presidential elections. But its authority is not unlimited. The Court can only act when the law gives it jurisdiction, and it must respect the boundaries set by the Constitution itself.
Understanding what the Supreme Court can and cannot do is essential for anyone who wants to understand how power is checked in Ghana. The Court is both powerful and constrained — a deliberate design that makes it the ultimate arbiter of constitutional disputes while preventing it from becoming an all-purpose problem solver.
Quick Facts
-
The Supreme Court is the final appellate body in Ghana’s court system .
-
It has original and exclusive jurisdiction over the interpretation and enforcement of the 1992 Constitution .
-
The Court can hear presidential election petitions and has determined landmark election cases .
-
It has supervisory jurisdiction over all courts in the country .
-
The Court cannot entertain “sterile” claims where the constitutional meaning is already clear and uncontested .
-
It has a limited review jurisdiction over its own decisions, exercised only in exceptional circumstances .
-
The Court sits with a minimum of five Justices and consists of not less than nine .
What the Supreme Court Is
The Supreme Court is established under Chapter 11 of the 1992 Constitution as the apex of Ghana’s judicial system. Its role was designed to achieve several objectives: to act as an independent entity free from executive and legislative control, to police the Constitution, to balance the executive and legislature, to protect individual liberties, and to serve as a buffer when democratic institutions are under strain .
Unlike the Supreme Court under the 1960 Constitution, which lacked clearly spelt-out powers of judicial review, the courts created under the 1969, 1979, and 1992 Constitutions were deliberately provided with powers of judicial review . The Court’s acquisition of these powers marked a turning point, enabling it to act as a protector of the Constitution and a defender of fundamental human rights .
What the Supreme Court Can Do
Interpret and Enforce the Constitution
The Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction in all matters relating to the enforcement or interpretation of the 1992 Constitution . This is the Court’s most distinctive power. When a question arises about whether an enactment was made in excess of the powers conferred on Parliament or any other authority, the Supreme Court is the body that decides.
This jurisdiction is triggered when the words of a constitutional provision are imprecise, unclear, or ambiguous; when rival meanings are placed on the words; when there is a conflict between two or more articles; or when there is a conflict between institutions set up under the Constitution .
Hear Presidential Election Petitions
The Constitution confers on the Supreme Court the power to hear and determine petitions relating to the election of the President . The landmark case of Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo and Others v John Dramani Mahama presented the most dramatic case in which the Court had to determine the fate of the 2012 presidential elections .
Exercise Supervisory Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court has supervisory jurisdiction over all courts in the country . This means it can issue orders to lower courts and ensure they act within the law.
Hear Appeals
The Supreme Court is the final appellate body. It hears appeals from the Court of Appeal and, in certain cases, from the High Court. It also determines matters relating to conviction for high treason, and appeals from the National House of Chiefs .
Review Its Own Decisions
The Supreme Court has a limited review jurisdiction over its own decisions. However, this is a special jurisdiction to be exercised only in exceptional circumstances. It is not an appellate jurisdiction. It is a kind of jurisdiction held in reserve, to be prayed in aid in the exceptional situation where a fundamental and basic error must have occasioned a gross miscarriage of justice .
Landmark Cases That Show the Court’s Power
The 31st December Case
In New Patriotic Party v Attorney-General (the 31st December case), the Supreme Court held that although Parliament had the right to legislate, all such legislation had to be within the parameters of the powers conferred by the 1992 Constitution. The Court declared unconstitutional the Public Holidays Law 1989 (PNDCL 220), which sought to establish 31 December as a public holiday in commemoration of the coup d’état that overthrew the 1979 Constitution. The Court refused to give its stamp of approval to an event that was palpably undemocratic .
The Public Order Decree Case
In New Patriotic Party v Inspector General of Police, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a Public Order Decree 1972 (NRCD 68), which required a permit from the police before citizens could exercise their right to assembly and demonstration. This decision, given as early as 1993, set the right tone for the protection of constitutional values .
The Delegate System Ruling
In a 2026 landmark ruling, the Supreme Court declared the use of delegate-based systems by political parties to select presidential and parliamentary candidates unconstitutional. The Court held that the internal organization of political parties must conform to the democratic principles required under Article 55(5) of the 1992 Constitution. It found that limiting participation to a relatively small group of delegates was inconsistent with the constitutional commitment to broad democratic participation .
The OSP Act Ruling
In the same 2026 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959), an outcome that anti-corruption advocates celebrated .
What the Supreme Court Cannot Do
Entertain “Sterile” Claims
The Supreme Court cannot exercise its original jurisdiction where the constitutional question is not genuine. Where the answers to the plaintiff’s claims are “obvious, self-evident and unambiguously stated” in the Constitution, the Court will decline jurisdiction. As the Court stated, it “cannot accede to sterile claims in which the defendant is bound to agree with the plaintiff” .
The Anin Doctrine, endorsed by the Supreme Court, holds that the Court may only exercise its exclusive original enforcement jurisdiction under Article 130(1)(a) when an ambiguity, imprecision, or lack of clarity in a constitutional provision exists .
Become Like “Makola Market”
The Supreme Court has warned against becoming a place where “everybody can shop needlessly,” resulting in the flooding of the Court. The additional value in allowing lower courts to participate in the enforcement of constitutional provisions is that it saves the Supreme Court from being overwhelmed by cases that lower courts could handle .
Review Decisions Outside Exceptional Circumstances
The review jurisdiction is not intended to be used as a device for re-hearing the applicant’s case. The applicant must demonstrate the existence of exceptional circumstances which have occasioned a miscarriage of justice. The mere existence of “defects” in the judgment will not render a review application successful .
Decide “Political Questions”
The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction is constrained by the designation of certain matters as “political questions.” The Court measures acts of the legislative and executive branches against the Constitution, but it does so only where the act in question does not come within that designation .
How the Court’s Jurisdiction Is Invoked
The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction must be properly invoked for decisions flowing from the exercise of that jurisdiction to be valid. When a party initiates proceedings under Article 130(1), the jurisdiction is invoked in proceedings regulated by Rules 45 to 53 of C.I. 16. When an issue arises in a court other than the Supreme Court, the reference must be done in accordance with Rule 67 of C.I. 16 .
This procedural framework ensures that the Court’s power is exercised within carefully regulated processes that allow a level playing field for every litigant .
Common Misconceptions
“The Supreme Court can fix any problem”
No. The Court can only act within its jurisdiction. It cannot entertain sterile claims where the constitutional meaning is already clear, and it cannot decide political questions. Its power is real but bounded.
“The Supreme Court can be overruled”
The Supreme Court’s decisions are final. It can only review its own decisions in exceptional circumstances. No other court can overrule it.
“The Supreme Court always accepts cases involving the Constitution”
No. The Court has declined jurisdiction where the real issues are not genuinely constitutional or where the matter is already clear and uncontested.
“The Supreme Court can review its decisions whenever it wants”
The review jurisdiction is limited to exceptional circumstances involving a fundamental error that has occasioned a miscarriage of justice. It is not a routine second chance.
“The Supreme Court controls the executive and legislature”
The Court can restrain the executive and legislature when they act unconstitutionally, but it cannot govern. It decides cases and controversies; it does not make policy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Supreme Court’s most important power?
Its original and exclusive jurisdiction over the interpretation and enforcement of the 1992 Constitution. This makes it the guardian of constitutionalism in Ghana .
Can the Supreme Court hear a case about the President?
The Court can hear presidential election petitions. It can also review executive actions for constitutionality. However, the President has immunity from personal civil or criminal proceedings while in office.
Can the Supreme Court strike down a law passed by Parliament?
Yes. Under Article 1(2) of the Constitution, any law found to be inconsistent with the Constitution is void to the extent of the inconsistency. The Supreme Court has exercised this power in landmark cases .
How many Justices sit on a Supreme Court case?
The Court is duly constituted by five Justices for its work. When reviewing its own decisions, it must be constituted by not less than seven Justices .
Can the Supreme Court refuse to hear a case?
Yes. The Court has declined jurisdiction in cases where the constitutional question is not genuine or where the matter is already clear and unambiguous .
What is the Anin Doctrine?
It is the principle that the Supreme Court may only exercise its exclusive original enforcement jurisdiction when there is an ambiguity, imprecision, or lack of clarity in a constitutional provision .
Can the Supreme Court review its own decisions?
Yes, but only in exceptional circumstances. The applicant must show a fundamental error that has occasioned a gross miscarriage of justice .
What to Remember
The Supreme Court is Ghana’s final court and its constitutional guardian. It can interpret the Constitution, strike down unconstitutional laws, restrain the executive, and determine presidential election disputes. Its decisions are final.
But the Court is not all-powerful. It cannot entertain sterile claims, decide political questions, or review its decisions outside exceptional circumstances. Its jurisdiction must be properly invoked, and it must respect the boundaries the Constitution sets.
The next time you hear about a Supreme Court ruling, remember the careful balance behind it. The Court is designed to be powerful enough to check the other branches of government, but constrained enough to remain a court of law rather than a council of rulers.
Source: The Accra Daily Mail
Samuel Kwame Boadu is a Ghanaian media entrepreneur and storyteller with a passion for amplifying urban voices and uncovering everyday truths. He is the Editor-in-Chief and Founder of The Accra Daily Mail, a dynamic digital platform dedicated to capturing the pulse of Ghana’s capital—its people, culture, challenges, business, sports and innovations.
