Proceedings in the ongoing divorce and custody dispute involving Joana Quaye and Richard Nii Armah Quaye (RNAQ) have taken a new turn, as the Accra Family Court considers an application seeking to restrict access by Mona Faiz Montrage, popularly known as Hajia4Reall, to the couple’s children.
The matter, which came before the court on Tuesday, June 2, centred on a motion for maintenance orders pending appeal. During the hearing, the Petitioner asked the court to issue orders limiting the children’s interaction with Hajia4Reall and also to regulate the Respondent’s access periods.
In support of the application, the Petitioner presented video evidence and referenced material relating to Hajia4Reall’s previous incarceration. It was argued that her association with the children may not be in their best interests. The Petitioner further alleged that the children’s social media exposure and behaviour had been negatively influenced by their environment and interactions while in the Respondent’s care.
Court documents also referred to a video involving one of the children, which the Petitioner said raised concerns about supervision and overall welfare. It was further indicated that the issue had been brought to the Respondent’s attention, and that he acknowledged concerns regarding the child’s conduct.
The Petitioner additionally contended that the Respondent’s alleged unavailability during periods when the children visited him resulted in them spending significant time in the company of Hajia4Reall and her child, who reportedly reside with the Respondent.
The Respondent, through counsel Nana Boakye Mensah-Bonsu, opposed the application, arguing that the reliefs sought would directly affect Hajia4Reall, who is not a party to the proceedings and has not been heard in court. Counsel maintained that granting such orders in her absence could raise issues of natural justice.
The Respondent also challenged the court’s jurisdiction to grant the requested orders after judgment had already been delivered, describing the application as procedurally inappropriate in the circumstances.
However, counsel for the Petitioner, Godfred Yeboah Dame, disagreed, citing provisions under Order 65 Rule 23(3) and (4) of C.I. 47 and the Matrimonial Causes Act as legal basis for the court’s authority to make post-judgment orders. He further indicated that the Petitioner would not oppose Hajia4Reall being served and participating in the proceedings if the court deemed it necessary.
On the video evidence submitted, counsel for the Respondent stated that the contents would be addressed after the court had reviewed the material.
After hearing submissions from both sides, the court indicated it would first review the video evidence before making further determinations. The matter was subsequently adjourned to June 26, 2026, for the court to view the footage, consider additional submissions, and rule on the pending motion for injunction.
