Former Speaker of Parliament, Prof. Mike Oquaye, has questioned the government’s plan to reintroduce public tribunals to handle illegal mining, popularly known as galamsey, suggesting instead that existing courts be strengthened to deal with such cases.
His comments come after President John Dramani Mahama announced, during an engagement with the Christian Council, that the Cabinet had approved the Public Tribunal Bill as part of efforts to address galamsey-related offences.
Speaking in an interview with Bernard Avle on Channel One TV’s The Point of View on Monday, December 15, Prof. Oquaye said he was opposed to the replication of institutions, especially when existing courts across the country are under-resourced.
He argued that circuit courts, High Courts, and magistrates’ courts should be improved and adequately resourced to handle galamsey cases, rather than creating new tribunals that may require additional infrastructure and staffing.
Prof. Oquaye noted that if the proposed tribunals are intended solely to address galamsey, they would likely be temporary, raising concerns about sustainability. While he acknowledged that temporary measures could be tolerated in exceptional circumstances, he maintained that the creation of special courts for specific offences undermines the general principle of equal treatment before the law.
He suggested that instead of setting up separate tribunals, the state should invest in expanding and upgrading existing court infrastructure and, where necessary, assign galamsey cases to designated courts within the current judicial system.
Prof. Oquaye said, “I don’t like replication of institutions. Are we now going to build or rent houses for the tribunals? When the circuit courts, High Courts, and Magistrates’ courts sit under shades in some places? I think that we must go with the existing courts and improve them, the buildings, the staff, all should become judicial service people.
He added, “If the tribunals are exclusively galamsey, it means they will be temporary. Is that not so? To deal with a situation for now, and then they are no more. I think that can be tolerated. But nevertheless, creating special courts for special situations offends a general principle.
“That is putting people before the ordinary court of he land. If they are going to be like circuit courts, let’s build those buildings, particularly assigning galamsey cases to them.”
