Supreme Court nominee, Justice Sophia Bernasko-Essah, has stated that the Supreme Court should be prepared to review or depart from its previous decisions when necessary to prevent injustice and ensure that the law remains consistent with the 1992 Constitution.
Justice Bernasko-Essah made the comments on Thursday, August 27, 2026, when she appeared before Parliament’s Appointments Committee for her vetting following her nomination by President John Dramani Mahama to the Supreme Court.
In response to the doctrine of judicial precedent and whether the apex court should be bound by its earlier decisions, the Court of Appeal judge said previous judgments are important in maintaining certainty and predictability within the legal system.
She, however, stressed that adherence to precedent should not prevent the Supreme Court from correcting an earlier position where it becomes clear that the decision has resulted in injustice, contains an error of principle, conflicts with the Constitution or is otherwise unworkable.
Justice Bernasko-Essah added that the Constitution itself provides the Supreme Court with the authority to depart from its previous decisions when circumstances justify such a departure.
“To the extent necessary, the Supreme Court under Article 129 (9) is required to depart from its decisions if need be. It is the case that the decision which have earlier been made creates a sense of certainty, predictability and stability.
“However, if it appears to the court that in a matter which has come before the court, it has created injustice or there was an error in the principle or it was inconsistent with the constitution or it is not workable, then the court can depart from its previous decision and give compelling reasons why it is departing from it and give its new position on the law.”