Prof. Kwaku Asare, also known as Kwaku Azar, has sparked national debate after raising concerns about what he describes as unsustainable and unfair retirement benefits for Ghana’s top judges.
In a Facebook post, the law professor questioned whether the country can continue affording “gilded benefits” for elite officeholders particularly justices of the Court of Appeal at a time when the nation faces severe economic challenges.
According to Prof. Asare, a retiring Court of Appeal justice currently earns a monthly salary of GH₵62,202.53, which continues to be paid for life after retirement. What’s more, the pension is indexed to the salary of sitting justices—meaning it increases whenever their salaries are adjusted.
In addition to the lifetime pension, a justice who has served 25 years receives a lump-sum gratuity equivalent to four months’ salary for each year served, amounting to over GH₵6.2 million.
“If even ten justices retire in a given year under these terms, the state will shell out over GH₵62 million in gratuities alone,” he stated, adding that annual pension payments would cost nearly GH₵8 million, excluding other benefits like housing, healthcare, and security.
Prof. Asare contrasted the lavish packages with the reality facing many Ghanaians, including national service personnel who earn under GH₵1,000 monthly, underpaid doctors, and unpaid contractors. He noted that public workers continue to face arrears while essential services like hospitals and schools remain underfunded.
“In such a context,” he asked, “can we honestly defend paying millions of cedis to a single individual in retirement while basic public services remain underfunded?”
While acknowledging the need to protect judicial independence through adequate compensation, Prof. Asare warned that current arrangements have gone beyond fairness.
“This judicial retirement scheme fails the test of fairness, effectiveness, and sustainability,” he argued. “It is fair only to the few, effective only in enriching a select class, and sustainable only if the rest of society agrees to permanent austerity.”
He criticized emoluments committees often chaired by academics and high level officials for what he described as crafting “golden parachutes in an economy begging for lifeboats.”
Prof. Asare ended his post with a rhetorical question: “Is it justice to give justices a golden parachute while the rest of society is asked to tighten their belts and take haircuts?”
