The Supreme Court of Ghana has nullified an arrest warrant previously issued against outspoken social commentator Kelvin Taylor. In a 4-1 majority decision delivered on Monday, July 22, the court ruled in favor of Taylor, effectively bringing an end to a long-standing legal battle over contempt charges.
The panel was chaired by Justice Imoro Amadu Tanko, with Justices Senyo Dzamefe, Gbiel Simon Suurbaareh, and Philip Bright Mensah forming the majority. Justice Ernest Gaewu dissented.
Also Read: Ablekuma North Victory Gives NDC Two-Thirds Majority in Parliament – Mahama Ayariga
Kelvin Taylor, visibly elated, exited the courtroom in high spirits alongside his legal team after the judgment was read.
The case stems from a contempt of court charge initiated in January 2020 by Justice Eric Kyei-Baffour, a Court of Appeal judge sitting as an additional High Court judge. Taylor had been accused of making “extremely scandalous” and contemptuous remarks about the judiciary, particularly alleging that Justice Kyei-Baffour’s promotion was politically influenced during a trial involving the National Communications Authority.
The High Court issued an arrest warrant for Taylor, who resides outside Ghana, directing the Ghana Police Service to apprehend him. Taylor, however, maintained that his statements were based on facts and argued that he was not given an opportunity to respond to the allegations before the warrant was issued.
On July 2, 2025, Taylor filed an application at the Supreme Court seeking to quash the warrant on grounds of procedural unfairness.
Taylor is well-known for his controversial commentary on Ghanaian politics through his online show With All Due Respect. He has previously faced other legal challenges, including a 2020 defamation ruling that ordered him to pay GHS 1 million in damages to Gabby Otchere-Darko.
The Supreme Court’s majority ruling reflects internal judicial debate on the enforcement of contempt laws, particularly concerning individuals outside the court’s jurisdiction. While the full reasoning behind the decision is yet to be published, the ruling may have broader implications for freedom of expression and how the judiciary addresses online criticism.
Legal experts and civil society groups are expected to weigh in on the ruling, as it may influence future handling of contempt cases and the limits of judicial authority over non-residents.
source: myjoyonline
