Sandra Frimpong Drags GBA To Court Over Young Lawyers Forum Election

A private legal practitioner, Sandra Frimpong, has filed a lawsuit against the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) at the High Court in Accra, challenging the association’s decision to reopen nominations for the 2024 Young Lawyers Forum (YLF) elections.

In the writ of summons issued from the High Court dated March 10^th, 2026, Oyarifa in Accra, as seen in the Writ of Summon, Ms. Frimpong is seeking several declarations from the court after the GBA allegedly reopened nominations for the position of Publicity Secretary of the Young Lawyers Forum despite her being the only nominated candidate.

The plaintiff argues that once nominations closed and she remained the sole candidate for the position, she should have been declared elected according to the association’s rules.

According to the court documents, Ms. Frimpong contends that the decision by the GBA to reopen nominations violates its constitution and the established election procedures.

“The Plaintiff avers that, in the latter part of the year 2024, the Defendant opened nominations for positions within the Young Lawyers Forum including the position of Publicity Secretary and she duly filed her nomination to contest for the said position.  

The Plaintiff further asseverates that, she satisfied all the requirements and successfully went through the nomination and vetting processes prescribed by the Defendant.

The Plaintiff says that, at the close of nominations, the Plaintiff was the only duly nominated candidate for the position of Publicity Secretary.

Also that, by the constitution and electoral rules governing the elections of the Defendant, a candidate who is unopposed at the close of nomination is deemed elected”, part of the statement of claim stated.

The writ indicates that the plaintiff is asking the court to declare that she was duly elected as the Publicity Secretary for the Young Lawyers Forum after nominations closed.

She is also seeking an order compelling the Ghana Bar Association to swear her into office.

The plaintiff further claims that the association acted beyond its authority when it decided to reopen nominations for the position after the election process had already reached a certain stage.

“The Plaintiff says that any action of the Defendant to declare the position of Publicity Secretary vacant and to reopen nominations is ultra vires the defendant’s constitution and against the earned rights of the Plaintiff,” the writ noted.

According to the statement of claim, the plaintiff argues that the reopening of nominations was not justified because the election process had only been temporarily halted by an earlier court case.

She maintains that once the legal matter that halted the process ended, the association should have continued with the same electoral process instead of restarting it entirely.

“The Plaintiff further says that once the earlier court case which halted the process has ended (outcome of which has not been communicated to plaintiff), the Defendant need to resume the same election process, and not restart it entirely”. the document added.

 Ms. Frimpong also insists that the term of office for the Young Lawyers Forum leadership, which runs from 2024 to 2027, has not expired, and therefore there is no legal basis for reopening nominations for the same position.

In her filing, the plaintiff claims that the actions of the Ghana Bar Association have caused her personal and professional harm.

“The action of the Defendant has caused the Plaintiff loss, inconvenience and reputational injury,” the statement of claim said.

She further alleged that despite making several attempts to communicate with the association over the issue, the GBA ignored her concerns and continued with plans to organise fresh nominations and elections.

“Despite several communications to the Defendant, it has ignored all and has made it a point to proceed to conduct fresh nominations and elections thereby rendering the Plaintiff’s rights irrelevant,” the writ stated.

The court document also warned the Ghana Bar Association to respond to the suit within the stipulated period after service of the writ.

“YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED that within EIGHT DAYS after service of this writ on you… you do cause an appearance to be entered for you,” the writ directed.

It further noted that failure by the defendant to respond within the given time could lead to judgment being entered against it.

“Take notice that in default of your so doing, judgment may be given in your absence without further notice to you,” the writ added.

As of the time of filing this report, the Ghana Bar Association had not filed a defence.