Ghana’s newly enacted legal education reforms mark a “milestone” in the country’s history, but any attempt by students to challenge transitional arrangements—particularly the entrance examination—will likely fail in court, legal academic Kwaku Ansa-Asarehas said.

Speaking on the Asaase Breakfast Show on Tuesday (12 May), the former director of the Ghana School of Law argued that provisions within the new legislation effectively shield ongoing processes from legal disruption.

He cited specific clauses dealing with revocation, consequential amendments and transitional provisions, noting that actions taken under repealed laws remain valid.

“Any act done under the old regime is deemed lawful under the new act,” he said, adding that the General Legal Council (GLC) would be within its rights to proceed with a scheduled entrance examination unless explicitly halted by law.

The comments come amid heightened debate over whether the controversial entrance exam has been abolished following presidential assent to the reforms.

Ansa-Asare cautioned against conflating the passage of the law with immediate operational changes, stressing that transitional provisions allow continuity.

“There is a difference between assent and immediate implementation,” he said.

He argued that cancelling the exam outright without a structured transition could worsen an already strained system, particularly as authorities attempt to clear a backlog of law graduates seeking professional training.

The reforms also dismantle the long-standing monopoly of the Ghana School of Law, opening the door for decentralised professional legal training.

Ansa-Asare described this as a historic shift, noting that the law school has now, for the first time since 1968, been formally established by statute—removing longstanding legal ambiguities.

Addressing concerns about declining standards, he pointed to regulatory safeguards within the law, including provisions empowering the minister to oversee quality assurance.

He added that collaboration among law faculties—particularly through a conference of deans—could ensure uniform curricula nationwide.

However, he warned that enforcement remains critical.

“If we don’t monitor attendance and integrity, monetisation and corruption could undermine the system,” he said.

Despite concerns, Ansa-Asare backed expanding legal education access, arguing that increasing the number of lawyers could improve justice delivery, especially in underserved areas.

“If done properly, more lawyers mean better national coverage and access to legal services,” he said.