On July 16, 2026, Ghana’s Parliament passed the Tribunals Bill, 2026, a landmark piece of legislation that seeks to reintroduce public tribunals into the country’s judicial system.

The bill, laid before Parliament on June 26, 2026, by the Minister for Lands and Natural Resources on behalf of Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Dr. Dominic Ayine, has sparked one of the most heated political and civic debates in recent Ghanaian history.

The legislation now awaits presidential assent from President John Dramani Mahama, who faces mounting pressure from both supporters and opponents of the bill.

What Is the Tribunals Bill?

The Tribunals Bill, 2026, is designed to establish a comprehensive legal framework for the operation of public tribunals in Ghana, in accordance with Articles 126 and 142 of the 1992 Constitution.

While the Constitution explicitly provides for the creation of Regional Tribunals as part of the judiciary, these tribunals have remained largely defunct or underutilized for decades. The bill seeks to activate these dormant constitutional provisions and create a functional two‑tier tribunal system.

Structure and Jurisdiction

The bill proposes a two‑tier tribunal structure:

Tier	Jurisdiction	Composition
Regional Tribunals	Concurrent jurisdiction with the High Court over selected criminal matters, including economic crimes, narcotics offenses, tax-related offenses, illegal mining (galamsey), corruption, and cases involving financial loss to the state	Chairperson (legally qualified) + two lay panel members
District Tribunals	Share criminal jurisdiction with Circuit Courts for specified matters, excluding treason, capital offenses, and cases triable on indictment	Chairperson (legally qualified) + two lay panel members

Key Features

• Lay panel participation: Each tribunal will be chaired by a legally qualified person but will sit alongside two ordinary citizens as panel members—a model intended to increase citizen participation and demystify the legal process.
• Tribunal Oversight Committee: The bill establishes a committee to supervise the administration and performance of tribunals.
• Appellate review: Decisions of tribunals will be subject to appeal, ensuring fairness and adherence to due process.
• Integration into the Judicial Service: Unlike the PNDC-era tribunals, the 2026 model operates under the strict oversight of the Chief Justice, with defendants retaining full constitutional rights to legal representation and fair trial procedures.

The Case for the Bill: Government’s Position

1. Addressing Court Backlogs

The Attorney-General has argued that the tribunals are urgently needed to address the growing backlog of cases in Ghana’s regular courts. Traditional courts accumulate approximately 3,360 new backlog cases annually, placing an unsustainable burden on the existing judicial infrastructure.

Dr. Ayine has explained that the legislation seeks to reduce delays in the hearing and determination of cases while ensuring stronger constitutional safeguards for tribunal operations.

2. Specialized Jurisdiction for Priority Crimes

The tribunals are specifically designed to provide faster adjudication for high-priority cases that demand expedited resolution, including:

• Illegal mining (galamsey) and environmental degradation
• Economic crimes and high-profile fraud
• Tax evasion and customs violations
• Corruption and cases involving financial loss to the state

3. Constitutional Activation

Proponents argue that the bill simply operationalizes what the 1992 Constitution already provides for. Article 126(1) of the Constitution states that the judiciary shall consist of the Superior Courts of Judicature—comprising the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the High Court, and Regional Tribunals—alongside such lower courts or tribunals as Parliament may establish.

4. Decongestion and Decentralization

The bill is also intended to improve access to justice at the local level, bringing adjudication closer to citizens in districts and regions across the country.

The Case Against the Bill: Criticism and Opposition

1. Minority in Parliament: “A Parallel Justice System”

The Minority Caucus, led by Alexander Kwamena Afenyo‑Markin, has been the most vocal opponent of the bill. Their primary contention is that the bill creates a parallel justice system not recognized under the 1992 Constitution.

Afenyo‑Markin argued during parliamentary debate: “We have a judicial system—district court, circuit court, high court, court of appeal, and the Supreme Court. If there are issues with the system, the way to go is to reform and to resource, equip, and retool. It is not to create a parallel system with coordinate jurisdiction.”

The Minority also raised concerns about jurisdictional confusion, questioning whether the proposed tribunals would handle civil or criminal matters and how they would fit into Ghana’s existing judicial hierarchy.

2. Concerns Over Composition: Non‑Lawyers Judging Criminal Matters

One of the most contentious provisions is Clause 4, which establishes that each tribunal will consist of a legally qualified chairperson and two non‑lawyer lay members.

The Minority argued that a body with only one legally trained member should not be responsible for determining criminal matters, warning that the arrangement could result in people being “pronounced guilty before their cases are properly determined.”

3. Historical Ghosts: The PNDC Era

The mention of “public tribunals” evokes painful memories of the Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) era in the 1980s.

Public tribunals were instituted under PNDC Law 24 in 1982 and functioned alongside the regular courts, addressing cases related to economic crimes, corruption, and offenses against the state. However, critics at the time argued that they lacked judicial independence and that “rather than prosecuting, they were persecuting.”

The Minority referenced this history, alleging that tribunals during the PNDC era were used to target individuals and confiscate their assets.

4. Trades Union Congress (TUC) Opposition

Organized Labour, through the Trades Union Congress (TUC) led by Secretary‑General Joshua Ansah, explicitly called on the government to withdraw the proposed law.

The TUC argued that tribunals—historically associated with parallel legal systems—are obsolete and could undermine public trust and confidence in the formal administration of justice. Labor leaders maintained that regional tribunals should be permanently removed via constitutional amendment rather than revived.

5. Bawumia’s Appeal: “Don’t Sign”

The NPP’s 2028 presidential candidate, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, has made a direct public appeal to President Mahama to withhold assent to the bill.

Addressing the nation on July 19, 2026, Bawumia argued that reforms affecting Ghana’s justice system should be built on broad public consensus rather than a parliamentary majority.

“Mr President, do not assent to this bill. Pause and let the nation ponder and deliberate on this very important matter,” Bawumia urged.

He warned that in its current form, the bill could become a “potent tool for weaponising justice delivery” —a phrase echoed by the TUC.

Bawumia also noted that the Constitution Review Committee established by the President had recommended removing regional tribunals from the constitution because the High Court had long carried their caseloads.

The Parliamentary Battle: How the Bill Was Passed

The passage of the bill was marked by dramatic scenes in Parliament:

1. June 26, 2026: The bill was laid before Parliament.
2. Committee Review: The bill underwent detailed examination by the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee and the Judiciary Committee.
3. Clause 4 Debate: The Minority sought to delete Clause 4 (establishing the tribunals).
4. Voice Vote: First Deputy Speaker Bernard Ahiafor put the proposal to a voice vote, which was rejected.
5. Headcount: The Minority demanded a headcount. The result: 135 votes against deleting Clause 4, 16 votes in favor—a decisive defeat for the opposition.
6. Minority Walkout: Following the vote, the Minority Caucus walked out of the chamber, declaring they would not participate in the remaining stages.
7. Waiver of Standing Orders: The mandatory one‑day interval between the consideration stage and third reading was waived, allowing the bill to be passed on the same day.
8. July 16, 2026: The bill passed its third reading.

Minority Leader Afenyo‑Markin explained the walkout: “Once the Majority Leader makes a strong pronouncement that whatever the case, they will not listen, they will use their numbers to pass the Bill, then there was no point again.”

He further stated that the NPP would reverse the tribunal system if elected in 2028.

What Happens Next?

The bill has been transmitted to President John Dramani Mahama for assent.

• If the President signs the bill, it becomes law, and the process of establishing Regional and District Tribunals will begin.
• If the President withholds assent—as urged by Bawumia, the TUC, and the Minority—the bill would stall, though Parliament could potentially override a veto.
• The Minority has also indicated it will challenge the bill in court if it is assented to, arguing that it is unconstitutional.

A Defining Moment for Ghanaian Justice

The Tribunals Bill, 2026, represents a defining moment for Ghana’s judicial and democratic trajectory. Supporters see it as a necessary reform to decongest the courts, expedite justice for serious crimes, and activate dormant constitutional provisions. Opponents view it as a dangerous retreat to the dark days of the PNDC era, warning of a parallel justice system that could undermine due process, fair trial guarantees, and public trust in the judiciary.

As President Mahama weighs his decision, the nation watches closely. The outcome will not only shape Ghana’s justice system for decades to come but will also test the strength of the country’s democratic institutions and the principle of constitutional checks and balances.