A new twist has emerged in the divorce proceedings involving businessman Richard Nii Armah Quaye and his former wife, Joana Quaye, after she formally petitioned Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie and the Judicial Council over concerns about the conduct of the trial judge.
The petition, filed through Dame & Partners, raises questions about the handling of proceedings by Justice Justin Dorgu, who issued final orders in the case on January 20, 2026, with the detailed written judgment subsequently released on April 20, 2026.
Court documents referenced in the petition indicate that the ruling covered key issues including property distribution, child custody arrangements, and maintenance obligations.
Joana Quaye contends that while the court delivered its final orders in January, the full reasoning behind the decision was not made available until after the statutory three month appeal period had expired on April 19, 2026. She argues that this sequence significantly affected her ability to properly evaluate the judgment and exercise her right of appeal within the required timeframe.
Her legal team maintains that the delay in releasing the written judgment raises serious concerns about procedural fairness and transparency in the administration of justice.
According to the petition, the applicant is also questioning why conclusions were pronounced before the comprehensive written judgment was finalised and released, describing the process as one that potentially undermines the integrity of appellate rights.
She further argues that the delayed publication of the judgment created uncertainty about the legal reasoning that informed the court’s decision, making it difficult for her to fully understand or challenge the outcome.
On this basis, Joana Quaye is requesting that the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council investigate whether the circumstances surrounding the judgment amount to judicial misconduct or procedural irregularity.
The petition calls for a formal review of the timeline and process through which the judgment was delivered and released, with emphasis on ensuring that such occurrences do not affect fairness in future judicial proceedings.
The matter now rests with the Judicial Council as it considers whether to initiate a review into the conduct of the proceedings and the concerns raised in the petition.
