)
Lawyers for the Deputy Minister of Health, Dr Grace Ayensu-Danquah, have issued a strong response to the Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC) following its directive ordering her to cease using the title of “Professor.”
According to her legal team, GTEC’s directive is “abrasive, unnecessarily combative, and disparaging.”
In a letter dated 12 August 2025, addressed to the Chief of Staff at the Office of the President and copied to Dr Ayensu-Danquah, the Minister of Health, the Clerk of Parliament, and the Board Chairman of GTEC, the Commission urged her employer to ensure she stops presenting herself with the academic title.
)
)
)
GTEC further warned that should she continue to use the designation, the Commission might be compelled to initiate legal action on the grounds of public deception.
However, in a response dated 13 August 2025, addressed to GTEC’s Director-General, Professor Ahmed Jinapor Abdulai, Dr Ayensu-Danquah’s solicitors, led by David K. Ametefe, argued that the directive lacked professionalism.
Her lawyers maintained that the Commission’s conclusions were not only unfounded but also procedurally irregular and damaging to her reputation.
ALSO READ: Commercial drivers threaten nationwide protest over deplorable Pokuase-Nsawam highway
The letter stated:
The assessment appears to have been carried out without transparency, and without clear indication of the statutory or regulatory framework relied upon.
It continued:
This lack of procedural clarity raises legitimate apprehension that the process was unguided and influenced by subjective or extraneous considerations.
ALSO READ: NPP grants amnesty to suspended members ahead of 2028 elections
Deputy Minister of Health, Dr Grace Ayensu-Danquah
The legal team also criticised the circulation of GTEC’s letters to high-ranking offices, including Parliament and the Presidency. They argued:
Your most recent letter was addressed directly to the Chief of Staff rather than to our client, a step that is both procedurally irregular and suggestive of an attempt to escalate a matter of academic interpretation into a political controversy.
Dr Ayensu-Danquah’s lawyers have demanded that GTEC disclose the full process behind its conclusions, clarify its statutory authority, and provide evidence that their client was given the opportunity to respond before the damaging correspondence was issued.
ALSO READ: Attorney General rejects BCEW, Commonwealth lawyers’ calls to reinstate CJ Torkornoo
They further insist on details of what mechanisms for appeal or redress exist within the Commission’s framework.
Failure to respond within fourteen (14) days, they cautioned, would compel their client to seek remedies in court, including orders of certiorari and mandamus, as well as declaratory relief to protect her reputation.