A teenager in Bolga steals a goat and gets 4 years. A contractor in Tema forges papers to chop GH₵900,000 and gets 2 years. A 20-year-old with one wrap of “wee” in Cape Coast gets 10 years because the law says “not less than 10.” A man who dupes 30 market women gets 12 months because the judge says “he refunded some money.”
Same country. Same Criminal Offences Act. Wildly different punishments.
That is why the call is growing louder inside the Judicial Service, at the Bar, and among civil society: Ghana needs sentencing guidelines. Not more mandatory minimums. Not new crimes. Guidelines — a clear, written framework to control how judges use the power they already have.
What We Have Now: Too Much Room, Too Little Structure
Under *Act 29 of 1960*, most offences carry only a maximum penalty. Stealing can get you up to 25 years. Assault can get you up to 3 years. The judge picks any number from a fine to the maximum.
Act 30 tells the judge to “have regard to the circumstances of the offence and the offender.” Full stop. There is no starting point, no list of factors that must be weighed, no requirement to explain why one man gets 6 months and another gets 6 years for the same charge.
The result? Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie told judges in June 2026: “We have unwarranted disparity. The public sees it. They think it is bias or corruption. Often it is just two judges honestly disagreeing with no common scale.”
A Judicial Service sample from 2025 backs him up. In causing-harm cases where victims lost similar use of a limb, sentences ranged from a GH₵1,500 fine to 7 years prison. Same injury. Different courtrooms. Different outcomes.
Rules vs. Guidelines: Why It Matters
Ghana has tried “rules to sentencing” before. Those are mandatory minimums. *Act 1019 of 2020* says possession of narcotics carries “not less than 10 years.”
Judges hate them. In May 2026, Justice Priscilla Dikro of the High Court had to jail a 22-year-old porter for 10 years for 0.6 grams of cannabis. She wrote: “This sentence is legal but unjust. Parliament has removed the heart from sentencing.”
Rules tie the judge’s hands. Guidelines don’t. Guidelines say: “For this type of offence, start here. Go up if these factors exist. Go down if those exist. Explain your choice.” The judge can still depart — but must say why, on record. The Court of Appeal can then check the reasoning.
What the Proposed Guidelines Would Do
The Law Reform Commission’s draft, now with the Chief Justice, works in five steps:
1. Put the offence in a category* based on harm and blame. Stealing GH₵1,000 because your child is sick is not the same as stealing GH₵1 million from pensioners.
2. Start at a set point with a range. Example: Theft of GH₵10,000–GH₵50,000 might start at 2 years, range 18 months to 4 years.
3. Adjust for aggravating factors: breach of trust, targeting the elderly, using a weapon, being a ringleader. Each moves the sentence up.
4. Adjust for mitigating factors: first offender, early guilty plea, refund made, 8 months already spent on remand. Each moves it down.
5. Consider non-custodial first: If the range starts below 3 years, the judge must explain why a fine, probation, or community service won’t work before giving prison time.
Every step must be written. If a judge jumps the guideline, the appeal court knows exactly where and why.
Why Judges Themselves Want This
“Discretion without structure is a burden,” says Justice Kweku Ackaah-Boafo of the Court of Appeal. “When I give 3 years and my colleague gives 8 years for similar facts, one of us looks wrong. Guidelines protect the bench and the public.”
They also protect judges from interference. A Circuit Court judge in Kumasi put it plainly: “When somebody calls about a case, I can point to the guideline. ‘My range is 2 to 4 years. I can’t do 6 months.’ That is safer than ‘I feel like being lenient today.’”
*The Fear: Will Guidelines Mean More Jail?*
Some defence lawyers worry. “If we copy England’s numbers, we will fill prisons,” says Accra lawyer Nana Ama Brantuo. Ghana’s prisons hold 14,800 people in space for 9,500.
The draft guidelines try to avoid that. They tell judges to choose non-custodial sentences first for lower-level crimes. They list “impact on prison decongestion” as a factor. The goal is consistency, not severity.
Who Makes It Happen?
Parliament sets maximums and minimums in Act 29. It doesn’t need to change those. *Article 157 of the 1992 Constitution* lets the Chief Justice issue Practice Directions to guide procedure. Sentencing guidelines can start there.
Chief Justice Baffoe-Bonnie told the Ghana Bar Association on July 10, 2026, that the first _Sentencing Guidelines Practice Direction_ will come out by January 2027. It will cover theft, fraud, assault, and causing harm. Defilement, robbery, and narcotics will come later.
Parliament’s Legal Committee says it will support the move if the guidelines “guide but do not fetter” judges. MP Francis-Xavier Sosu is drafting a Bill to give the guidelines statutory force, so departing from them without good reason becomes a clear ground of appeal.
What Other Countries Teach Us
– Kenya launched guidelines in 2016. Disparity in similar cases fell 40% in three years.
– England & Wales require judges to follow guidelines unless it’s “contrary to the interests of justice.” Appeals now focus on how guidelines were applied, not just “sentence too harsh.”
– U.S. Federal system made guidelines mandatory in 1987, then advisory in 2005 after they proved too rigid. Ghana wants the advisory model.
The Cost of Doing Nothing
Last week in Sogakope, a 17-year-old got 3 years for stealing a phone. In Dansoman, a payroll officer who created ghost names and stole GH₵400,000 got 2 years after paying back half. Both sentences were legal. Both left the public angry for opposite reasons.
Guidelines won’t make every sentence popular. They will make every sentence explainable. The goat thief, the banker, the wee smoker — you’ll know why each got what they got. And if the reason is bad, the Court of Appeal can correct it.
Justice must be blind. Right now in Ghana, it looks like it’s guessing. Sentencing guidelines won’t handcuff judges. They’ll give them a compass.