A newly introduced Legislative Instrument governing court filing fees has triggered growing concern over access to justice, following reports that the cost of compiling appeal records has risen sharply, placing a heavy financial burden on litigants seeking to exercise their constitutional right to appeal.
Under the new regime, the cost of compiling appeal records at court registries has increased to GH¢13 per page, up from GH¢1 per page, representing a staggering 1,200 per cent increase. This sudden hike risks turning the right to appeal into a privilege reserved for only the financially secure.
The impact of the policy has already begun to manifest in real cases. In one recent land dispute currently before the courts, a family seeking to file an appeal was required to compile approximately 260 pages of trial records, with six sets mandated by procedure. At the new rate, this translated into GH¢3,380 per set, amounting to a total cost of GH¢20,280 before the appeal process could even begin.
For the family involved, the cost was not merely prohibitive but alarming. “This is not just a personal hardship. It raises serious questions about whether ordinary Ghanaians can realistically access the appellate system anymore,” a member of the family said.
This issue goes beyond individual cases and strikes at the heart of fairness and transparency in the justice system. The right to appeal is a fundamental safeguard against judicial error, but excessive administrative costs now risk silently discouraging legitimate appeals, especially among low- and middle-income citizens.
This is how justice becomes inaccessible, not through denial, but through cost. When fees rise this steeply without adequate public debate or safeguards, the effect is exclusionary.
The concern is particularly acute for cases involving land disputes, inheritance matters, labour claims, and family law; areas where litigants are often individuals rather than corporations, and where the stakes are deeply personal.
The sharp increase in appeal record fees has reignited debate about the balance between court administration costs and citizens’ rights. While authorities may argue that the new fees reflect the real cost of compiling, printing, and certifying court records, critics insist that cost recovery must not override access to justice.
When citizens perceive the justice system as financially out of reach, confidence in the rule of law weakens, and disputes may increasingly be resolved outside formal legal channels, sometimes with dangerous consequences. There must be room for review, exemptions, or graduated fees. Otherwise, justice risks becoming transactional rather than constitutional.
This development demands broader public scrutiny and informed discussion, particularly within the Judicial Service, the Attorney-General’s Department, Parliament, and the legal profession.
Reforms affecting court access should be accompanied by impact assessments, stakeholder engagement, and clear communication, especially when fee increases are as significant as the current adjustment.
As more litigants begin to encounter the new costs, pressure is likely to mount for clarity on whether mechanisms exist to protect vulnerable litigants or whether the policy may be reviewed.
For now, the issue stands as a sobering reminder that justice delayed by cost can become justice denied, and that the health of a democracy is often measured not by the laws it enacts, but by how accessible those laws are to its citizens.
EL Citizen Vigilante
