The Family Court in Accra on Tuesday, June 2, heard arguments over an application seeking to limit access by socialite and musician Mona Faiz Montrage, popularly known as Hajia4Reall, to the children of businessman Richard Nii Armah Quaye (RNAQ) and his estranged wife, Joana Quaye.
The application forms part of the ongoing divorce proceedings between the couple and was raised during a hearing on a motion for maintenance orders pending appeal.
As part of the reliefs being sought, the Petitioner is asking the court to restrict the children’s interaction with Hajia4Reall and reduce the Respondent’s periods of access to the children.
In support of the application, the Petitioner submitted video evidence and referenced Hajia4Reall’s previous incarceration, arguing that her association with the children may not be in their best interests. The Petitioner also alleged that the children’s social media behaviour had been negatively influenced by their environment and experiences while in the care of the Respondent.
Court documents further cited a video involving one of the children, which the Petitioner said raised concerns about the child’s welfare and supervision. According to the filing, the issue was brought to the Respondent’s attention, and he reportedly acknowledged concerns about the child’s conduct.
The Petitioner also argued that the Respondent’s alleged absence during some visitation periods resulted in the children spending substantial time with Hajia4Reall and her child, who the Petitioner claims reside with the Respondent.
Respondent Opposes Application
Counsel for the Respondent, Nana Boakye Mensah-Bonsu, opposed the application and challenged the orders being sought.
He argued that the proposed restrictions would directly affect Hajia4Reall, who is not a party to the proceedings and has not been given the opportunity to respond to the allegations. Granting such orders without hearing from her, he contended, could violate the principles of natural justice.
The Respondent further maintained that the reliefs being sought were not available under the circumstances and questioned whether the court had jurisdiction to grant the orders after judgment had already been delivered in the matter.
However, counsel for the Petitioner, Godfred Yeboah Dame, disagreed. He argued that provisions under Order 65 Rule 23(3) and (4) of C.I. 47, together with the Matrimonial Causes Act, empower the court to make post-judgment orders where necessary.
Mr Dame also indicated that the Petitioner would not object if the court decided to serve the application on Hajia4Reall or allow her to participate in the proceedings.
Addressing the video evidence, counsel for the Respondent said his legal team would respond to its contents after the court had reviewed the material.
Court Adjourns Case
Following submissions from both sides, the court said it would first review the video evidence filed in support of the application before making any further decisions.
The case was subsequently adjourned to June 26, 2026, when the court is expected to view the video evidence, hear any additional submissions arising from it, and consider the Petitioner’s pending motion for an injunction.