Performance of Legal Professionals
The Practice Performance coverage is dedicated to assessing and evaluating the performance of key participants within the Ghanaian legal system. By providing transparent and comprehensive evaluations, we aim to enhance accountability and trust in our judicial processes. This scope includes assessments of Judges, Solicitors, the Courts, and the implementation of judgements.
To evaluate any litigation event, participants in control of the process, and those administering a litigation process, click the required button below to present your personal view and comment, recommendations, and suggestions to help improve Ghana's legal systems.
We assess solicitors based on their legal expertise, client representation, and ethical standards. This evaluation aims to promote high-quality legal services and encourage solicitors to maintain professional excellence and accountability in their practice.
We evaluates the performance of judges based on their adherence to legal principles, efficiency in case management, and fairness in delivering judgements. By assessing these critical areas, we aim to ensure that judges uphold the highest standards of judicial conduct and integrity.
We examines the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the courts. It includes assessments of court administration, case backlog management, and the transparency of court proceedings. Our goal is to identify areas for improvement to enhance the delivery of justice.
Evaluating the implementation of judgements is crucial to ensure that court decisions are enforced promptly and effectively. This section assesses the execution of court orders, compliance with legal mandates, and the impact of judgements on the involved parties. By focusing on these areas, we aim to uphold the integrity of the judicial system and ensure that justice is served.
Solicitors Performance
Judges Performance
The Courts Performance
Judgement Implementation
In many Ghanaian communities, traditional dispute resolution mechanisms are preferred over formal legal proceedings. Elders and community leaders often mediate conflicts, leveraging their authority and respect within the community to resolve issues amicably. This cultural preference stems from the belief that traditional methods are more accessible, cost-effective, and aligned with community values. As a result, many Ghanaians may be reluctant to engage with the formal legal system, perceiving it as less relevant or out of touch with their everyday experiences.
Respect for Authority
Traditional Dispute Resolution
Cultural Influences
Ghanaians traditionally hold a deep respect for authority figures, including judges and government officials. This cultural norm can lead to a reluctance to question or challenge the performance of these figures, even when there are legitimate concerns about their effectiveness or fairness. This deference can contribute to a general acceptance of the status quo within the legal system, as individuals may feel constrained by social norms from expressing dissatisfaction or seeking reforms.
Corruption and patronage networks within the political and legal systems can also contribute to the reluctant acceptance of the legal system's performance. When individuals perceive that legal outcomes are influenced by bribery, favoritism, or connections rather than justice, it erodes trust and fosters cynicism. Many Ghanaians may feel that challenging the system is futile in the face of widespread corruption, leading to a passive acceptance of its shortcomings and a reliance on informal or alternative dispute resolution methods.
Political Influences
Corruption and Patronage
Political Influences
The perception and reality of political interference in the judicial system can significantly impact public trust and acceptance of the legal system's performance. When judicial appointments and decisions are seen as influenced by political considerations rather than based on merit or legal principles, it undermines confidence in the system's impartiality and effectiveness. This perception can lead to a resigned acceptance of the legal system's limitations, as people may feel that change is unlikely due to entrenched political interests.