Former Rector of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA), Professor Philip Ebow Bondzi-Simpson, has provided an in-depth historical account of the evolution of Ghana’s judicial system, describing the country’s 150-year judicial journey as one shaped by colonial rule, constitutional reforms, customary law, military interventions and the gradual development of an independent judiciary.Delivering the maiden lecture of the Supreme Court @150 Anniversary Lecture Series at the University of Cape Coast on Thursday, July 2, Prof. Bondzi-Simpson said the anniversary offered an opportunity not only to celebrate the country’s highest court but also to reflect on the historical developments that laid the foundation for Ghana’s modern justice system.He explained that the establishment of the Supreme Court in 1876 did not mark the beginning of organised judicial administration in the Gold Coast but rather unified existing judicial structures operating across the British territories in West Africa.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson noted that when the Supreme Court Ordinance of 1876 came into force, it incorporated existing courts that had already been operating in the Gold Coast, Lagos and Sierra Leone.According to him, the Gold Coast had separated administratively from Sierra Leone in 1874, but the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court established two years later still extended to Lagos.“As we celebrate our 150 years, we should also remember that our brothers and sisters from Sierra Leone and Lagos were part of this judicial history,” he said.He stressed that the anniversary should therefore be viewed as a shared legal milestone for parts of British West Africa that once operated under a common judicial framework.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson explained that despite its name, the Supreme Court established under the 1876 Ordinance functioned primarily as a trial court, equivalent to today’s High Court, although it exercised limited appellate jurisdiction.He said the court operated through three principal divisions: the Full Court, the Divisional Court and the Special Divisional Court.The Full Court consisted of the Chief Justice together with other judges sitting collectively, while the Divisional Court comprised a single judge exercising the full jurisdiction of the Supreme Court within a designated province or district.Where judges from two divisions jointly heard a matter, the court became known as the Special Divisional Court.“The judge posted to a district exercised the full powers of the Supreme Court within that jurisdiction,” he explained.One of the distinguishing features of the colonial judicial system, Prof. Bondzi-Simpson observed, was the fusion of judicial, executive and administrative authority.He explained that District Commissioners simultaneously served as magistrates responsible for adjudicating disputes within their jurisdictions.“The political head of the district was also the district magistrate,” he said.According to him, combining political and judicial authority in a single office inevitably created conflicts and administrative difficulties, an arrangement that was gradually reformed over subsequent decades.He noted that the traditional honorific “Your Worship”, still used by magistrates today, originated from that historical arrangement.The legal scholar described the 1876 Supreme Court Ordinance as one of the most comprehensive pieces of legislation enacted during the colonial period.Spanning more than 160 pages with annexures, the Ordinance served multiple functions that are today covered by separate statutes.“It served as the Courts Act, the Legal Profession Act, the Evidence Act and even contained the Rules of Court,” he explained.Over time, he said, these various legal functions were separated into specialised legislation as Ghana’s legal system matured.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson also traced the historical origins of several court offices still in existence today.He explained that officers initially designated as “messengers” were responsible for serving court processes and maintaining order within courtrooms.These officers were appointed by the Sheriff, who at the time also headed the colonial constabulary.Subsequent amendments to the law renamed the officers as bailiffs, the designation that continues to be used within Ghana’s judicial system.A significant portion of the lecture examined the relationship between customary law and the colonial courts.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson explained that although customary law was recognised under colonial administration, native courts were initially excluded from the formal judicial structure.Traditional authorities continued resolving disputes under customary law, while colonial courts retained supervisory powers through the application of the Repugnancy Clause, under which customary practices considered inconsistent with justice or colonial legal principles could be set aside.He explained that formal recognition of native courts only emerged during the 1940s through a series of legislative reforms.Even today, he observed, Ghana’s Constitution recognises customary law as part of the country’s common law, while judicial committees of the Houses of Chiefs continue to exercise jurisdiction over chieftaincy disputes.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson highlighted what he described as the cautious approach adopted by colonial authorities towards appointing Africans to senior judicial office.Although the Supreme Court had been established in 1876, he noted that it was not until 1925 that the first Ghanaian was appointed as a puisne judge.He suggested that colonial administrators were reluctant to entrust judicial authority to indigenous legal professionals, preferring to maintain European dominance within the superior courts.The lecture also examined Ghana’s historical links with overseas appellate courts.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson explained that litigants could appeal decisions from the Gold Coast to the West African Court of Appeal (WACA) and, ultimately, to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London.He noted that although WACA experienced periods of inactivity, it remained part of Ghana’s judicial structure until independence.The 1957 Independence Constitution maintained appeals to the Privy Council because Ghana initially attained Dominion status under the British Crown.However, following the adoption of the Republican Constitution in 1960, appeals to both WACA and the Privy Council were abolished.“The Republic marked the complete judicial break from colonial appellate institutions,” he observed.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson explained that the 1960 Constitution fundamentally transformed Ghana’s superior courts by creating the modern Supreme Court as the country’s apex judicial authority.Before then, the institution known as the Supreme Court had effectively functioned as today’s High Court.The Republican Constitution established a two-tier superior court system comprising the High Court and the new Supreme Court, with constitutional interpretation and final appellate jurisdiction vested in the latter.Subsequent Constitutions introduced the Court of Appeal, creating the current three-tier superior court hierarchy consisting of the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.The former GIMPA Rector also reviewed the constitutional evolution of Ghana’s chieftaincy institutions.He said successive constitutions gradually strengthened the legal recognition of the National and Regional Houses of Chiefs while establishing judicial committees to determine chieftaincy disputes.Although chiefs increasingly assumed adjudicatory functions, he noted that decisions of the National House of Chiefs remain subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.Turning to Ghana’s periods of military rule, Prof. Bondzi-Simpson said successive military governments significantly altered the country’s judicial landscape.He observed that some military administrations suspended or abolished courts, while others introduced institutional arrangements that reflected revolutionary priorities.These interventions, he argued, left lasting effects on judicial administration, although subsequent constitutional reforms restored the independence and authority of the courts.Prof. Bondzi-Simpson concluded that the history of Ghana’s judiciary reflects a gradual transition from colonial legal administration to an independent constitutional system rooted in the rule of law.He urged participants in the Supreme Court’s 150th anniversary celebrations to appreciate not only the institution’s longevity but also the complex historical developments that have shaped its evolution.According to him, understanding the judiciary’s past is essential to safeguarding its future and strengthening public confidence in the administration of justice.