Ghana’s Parliament has approved three nominees for appointment to the Supreme Court following a tense and controversial vetting process that saw the Minority Caucus stage a walkout.

The approved nominees are Justice Sophia Rosetta Bernasko Essah, Justice Edward Amoako Asante and private legal practitioner Anthony Forson Jnr.

Their approval came after Parliament adopted the report of the Appointments Committee, which recommended all three nominees for positions on Ghana’s highest court.

President John Dramani Mahama nominated the three after consultations required under the constitutional appointment process, with their names subsequently forwarded to Parliament for consideration.

However, the process was far from smooth.

The Minority, led by Alexander Afenyo-Markin, strongly objected to what it described as an unusually rushed vetting timetable. The caucus argued that there was no existing vacancy on the Supreme Court bench that required Parliament to fast-track the nominations during its emergency recall.

The Minority also raised concerns about the limited period available for public input and parliamentary scrutiny, insisting that appointments to the country’s highest court deserved a more extensive examination.

Despite those objections, Chairman of Parliament’s Appointments Committee, Bernard Ahiafor, rejected the Minority’s arguments and allowed the vetting process to continue. The Minority subsequently walked out, leaving the Majority side to proceed with the exercise.

Following the vetting, the Appointments Committee recommended all three nominees for approval, paving the way for Parliament to endorse them.

Justice Bernasko Essah and Justice Amoako Asante are both Court of Appeal judges. Amoako Asante previously served as President of the ECOWAS Court of Justice, while Anthony Forson Jnr., a respected private legal practitioner, previously served as President of the Ghana Bar Association.

The addition of the three justices is expected to increase the number of judges on Ghana’s Supreme Court from 18 to 21.

Their parliamentary approval clears a major constitutional hurdle toward their formal appointment to the Supreme Court, even as debate continues over the speed and circumstances surrounding the process.