Paper short abstract:

This paper will focus on judicial politics and judges’ negotiations with other branches of gov-ernment in Ghana in the mid-2000s. It analyses the political setting of these negotiations and the main actors’ arguments and strategies to strengthen the courts’ role in democratic gov-ernment.

Paper long abstract:

In the mid-2000s, reform efforts in the Ghanaian court system were stepped up. The rule of law and the courts' and judges' role as guardians of democracy, freedom and human rights as well as their role in establishing a sound economic system were highlighted in negotiations between the different branches of government. It came as a surprise to the Ghanaian executive how the habitually cautious and reserved judges put forward forceful arguments, aptly coined in 'policy language', to gain financial support for judicial reforms and to improve their institu-tional independence. The Ghanaian judiciary led negotiations in its own right. Why at that time, who did it and how? Intergovernmental negotiations on a broader level were seen as a new task for the judicial service and demanded more than the legal skills usually expected from judges. This paper aims at showing how some actors in the judiciary have become major players in the formal and informal system of checks and balances between the branches of government in Ghana. It traces the collaborative efforts of some judges of the Supreme Court and of the Judicial Service administration, who used accounts on the daily challenges of Gha-naian courts on all levels not only to justify shortcomings but to argue for reforms and in-vestments to increase public accountability and institutional independence. This paper analyses the political setting of these negotiations and the main actors' arguments and strategies to strengthen the courts' effectiveness and legitimacy in an era of democratic government.