Federation of Women Lawyers, Ghana (FIDA-Ghana), a non-profit organisation devoted to the promotion, protection, and advancement of the rights of women and children, has petitioned the office of the Chief Justice (CJ) concerning the judge that handled the divorce case of Joana Quaye, the ex-wife of billionaire Richard Nii Armah Quaye (RNAQ).
Women in PR
The group is calling for the implementation of educational programmes for magistrates and judges on matrimonial and gender-based cases that reflect fairness and does not denigrate the integrity of women
The petition, signed by FIDA-Ghana President, Gloria Ofori-Boadu, follows Justice Justin Kofi Dorgu handling of the case and some expressions used in his judgment which they find offensive and unfortunate.
According FIDA-Ghana, its concern is not with the authority of the court to determine the rights of parties before it, nor is it an attempt to interfere with the principle of judicial independence.
“Rather, our concern lies in aspects of the reasoning and language employed in the judgment which diminish the dignity of women before the courts and weaken public confidence in the fairness, neutrality and sensitivity of judicial reasoning in family law matters, in addition to being a complete departure from recognised principles governing distribution of marital property,” part of the petition read.
It indicates that for many women, the family court is not merely a forum of litigation, but the place they go to when a marriage has broken down, when children must be protected, when resources are unequal, and when the law becomes their last refuge.
“In such circumstances, the language and reasoning of the court matter deeply. It is not enough that justice be done. The reasoning by which justice is expressed must affirm the dignity, equality, and humanity of those who stand before the court,” it added.
The group finds the judge’s reference to Joana Quaye as ‘physically… attractive’ and ‘capable of remarrying anytime she felt like,’ in the context of deciding financial relief to be granted her, “is, with respect, offensive and deeply troubling.”
It says such commentary has no place in the legal analysis as it suggests that a woman’s entitlement to justice may be weighed against stereotypes about her appearance, desirability, or remarriage prospects.
“That implication is incompatible with the dignity of litigants and with the objectivity expected of judicial determinations,” it stressed.
The group further indicates that it is equally alarmed by the judge’s assertion that “marriage is not an investment” and the characterisation of the petitioner’s financial claim as “ridiculous”.
According to the petition, a court is, of course, entitled to reject or reduce claims not supported by law or evidence.
“However, the language used in doing so should remain measured, relevant, and restrained. More importantly, any approach to financial relief on divorce must take proper account of the reality that women’s contributions to marriage are often not only direct and monetary, but more indirect, domestic, emotional, managerial, and developmental. To dismiss or diminish this reality risks sending a message that the invisible labour of women has little legal value,” the group pointed out.
Again, it expresses concern about the statement that financial relief should operate “as a way of dissuading these frequent divorces.”
It says the courts do not exist to deter people from seeking lawful relief when a marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation.
The petition also expressed displeasure with the judge’s reference to RNAQ’s earning capacity and “numerous companies,” yet orders GH¢5,000 monthly maintenance for three minor children “while also employing language that appears to devalue the Petitioner’s position and contributions.”
Again, the group expressed “dismay” about what it described as “apparent deviation” of the judge from the constitutional and jurisprudential framework governing spousal property distribution in Ghana, partially Article 22 of the Constitution and recent Supreme Court decisions.
Women in PR
“These concerns are not abstract. FIDA-Ghana also considers it important to emphasise the wider public implications of offensive judicial language in family law matters. What is said in courtrooms does not remain in courtrooms. Women and children read these judgments. Lawyers cite them. Families discuss them. They become part of the social vocabulary through which marriage, separation, property, and worth are understood.
“A judgment that appears to suggest that a woman’s dignity may be weighed against her appearance or her perceived prospects of remarriage does more than affect one litigant. It risks discouraging many others from approaching the courts at all,” it stressed.
The group further noted that the concerns raised in the petition are not merely emotional or political, but are measured against the standards the judiciary has set for itself.
“It is in these circumstances that we respectfully invite Your Lordship to consider such administrative, educational, or other appropriate measures as may reinforce gender-sensitive adjudication in matrimonial matters,” the petition added.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak
