Executives of AWLA Ghana
The Executive Director of the African Women Lawyers Association (AWLA) Ghana, Effiba Amihere, has called for urgent reforms to Ghana’s spousal property rights, describing the current legal framework as inconsistent and unfair to many spouses, particularly women.
Speaking at a press conference in Accra yesterday, she said the issue of spousal property rights is an important part of constitutionalism, gender justice and the lived realities of Ghanaian families.
According to her, Article 22 of the 1992 Constitution clearly mandates Parliament to enact legislation regulating the property rights of spouses, yet more than three decades later, Ghana still lacks a comprehensive statutory framework.
“Article 22 of the 1992 Constitution is clear and unequivocal. It mandates Parliament to enact legislation regulating the property rights of spouses. This provision was not aspirational. It is a directive,” she stressed.
She explained that the continued absence of legislation has created a vacuum, forcing the courts to develop principles on a case-by-case basis.
“While this judicial intervention has been necessary, it has also resulted in doctrinal inconsistency, uncertainty and ultimately injustice on the evolution of judicial doctrine between equity and uncertainty,” she said.
Ms. Amihere noted that although the Supreme Court has attempted over the years to define principles governing the distribution of marital property, there remains uncertainty between equality-based distribution and proof of contribution. She stressed that the uncertainty surrounding the law has had severe consequences for many spouses, especially women who often struggle to prove non-financial contributions during divorce proceedings.
She added that many spouses have been denied equitable shares in property acquired during marriage and left economically vulnerable following divorce or separation.
“The law, as it currently exists, often fails to adequately recognise the invisible labour that sustains the family,” she noted.
She also criticised what she described as the introduction of irrelevant and subjective considerations into matrimonial disputes.
“A party’s physical appearance has no legal relevance to the determination of property rights or financial relief,” she stressed.
She maintained that judicial discretion must remain grounded in law, fairness and equity.
“The Supreme Court has consistently emphasised that judicial discretion must be exercised on relevant considerations only grounded in law and equity,” she stated.
She reiterated that marriage should be recognised as a joint enterprise where contributions extend beyond direct financial support.
“These authorities make it clear that marriage is a joint enterprise. Contribution is broad and inclusive,” she added.
By Vera Owusu Sarpong