Lawyer Lawrence Kwesi Botchway Jnr., a private legal practitioner and barrister of the Supreme Court of Ghana, has criticized the court ruling that led to the one-week remand of Kwame Baffoe, popularly known as Abronye, the Bono Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
Abronye has been remanded into police custody for one week by an Accra Circuit Court. The court said that the remand is to allow prosecutors sufficient time to conduct further investigations into the case
In a Facebook post on Friday, September 12, 2025, Lawyer Botchway pointed out what he described as a glaring error in the judgment. He explained that the judge had ascribed a quote to the late Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe when, in fact, it originated from former Ugandan leader Idi Amin.
“The quote the judge ascribed to President Mugabe in Abronye’s case is wrong. That quote was by Iddi Amin. Since when did quotes from Iddi Amin become an authority in Ghanaian courts?” Lawyer Botchway questioned.
He further expressed deep frustration over the court ruling involving the Bono Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Kwame Baffoe, popularly known as Abronye.
The lawyer further declared: “I am broken and shattered! I feel soo sorry for our judiciary and democracy after reading the court’s ruling in Abronye’s matter! This can’t be rule of law! This can’t be justice and this can’t be democracy!”
He slammed the judge’s reliance on non-legal references, questioning the foundations of the ruling. “Since when did quotes from Robert Mugabe and Animal Farm become legal authorities? Whaaaaaaaatttt!” he exclaimed.
Lawyer Botchway further argued that the court failed to substantiate its decision with appropriate constitutional or statutory provisions beyond a general reference to Section 96 of Act 30, which governs bail.
“With the exception of section 96 of Act 30 which generally provides for the law on bail, the judge could not cite any other relevant constitutional provision, statutory provision or case law from any higher court to substantiate why a fellow citizen should be deprived of his liberties for 7 good days except to quote his own previous ruling,” he lamented.
The private legal practitioner described the ruling as scandalous and contrary to the principles of justice. “I am totally scandalized by the ruling. For Christ sake, the court is a court of law and not a court of morals… what is not in the law cannot be smuggled into the law!” he stressed.
About The Author
