Justice Gertrude Torkornoo
The legal battle against the suspension of Justice Gertrude Torkornoo as Ghana’s Chief Justice has taken another turn, as she has filed a suit challenging her suspension and the inclusion of two Supreme Court Justices on the committee probing the three petitions filed against her.
An application for interlocutory injunction attached to a writ filed at the Supreme Court is seeking among other things, an order restraining the committee set up by the President to inquire into the three petitions against her from proceeding with an inquiry, the execution of the terms of reference of the committee or taking any action in connection with the purported determination of a prima facie case made against her until the hearing and final determination of the writ.
She is also asking for an order restraining Justices Gabriel Scott Pwamang (Chairman) and Samuel Adibu-Asiedu (member) from presiding over or participating in proceedings of the committee appointed by the President to inquire into the three petitions.
She avers that by articles 23, 146(6) and (7) and 296(a) and (b) of the Constitution, Justice Pwamang, is not qualified to be a chairman or member of the committee probing the petitions against her, on account of having adjudicated and given various rulings in favour of one of the petitioners, Daniel Ofori, in actions filed at the Supreme Court.
In terms of Justice Adibu-Asiedu, she avers that his appointment on the committee is unconstitutional because he had already sat as a member of a panel of the Supreme Court to hear an application for interlocutory injunction filed by a Ghanaian citizen challenging the petitions initiated against her.
Justice Torkornoo has also decided to waive her right to an in-camera hearing, arguing that she is entitled to a public hearing in the three petitions calling for her removal as the Chief Justice.
She also argues that the failure to serve her with a judicious determination of a prima facie case before appointing a committee to purportedly inquire into the petitions for her removal as Chief Justice constitutes a violation of her right to substantive administrative justice and fair hearing, rendering the entire proceedings initiated null and void.
This suit was filed just few hours after the Supreme Court by a 4:1 majority decision dismissed two more applications seeking to halt the processes leading to the suspension of Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo as the Chief Justice, describing both applications as being “unmeritorious.”
President John Mahama on April 22, 2025, suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo following the setting up of a five-member committee to probe the three petitions calling for her removal from office.
The Supreme Court has since dismissed three separate applications calling for the revocation of the suspension and an order nullifying the steps taken by the President in respect of the petitions as well as the setting up of a five-member committee to probe the petitions.
CJ’s Suit
Justice Torkornoo has now filed a writ herself seeking to declare the processes leading to her suspension as null and void and should be set aside.
She wants a declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of articles 17(1) and (2), 19(13) and (14), 23, 146(7) and (8), 281(1) and 295(1) of the Constitution, the right of a Chief Justice to a public hearing and all the incidents of a fair hearing may only be excluded in the interest of public morality, public safety, or public order.
She also wants a declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of articles 19(13), 23, 146(1), (2), (4) and (6) and 296 of the Constitution, a determination of a prima facie case in respect of a petition for the removal of a Chief Justice or a Justice of the Superior Court of Judicature is a quasi-judicial process requiring a judicious evaluation, culminating in a reasoned decision.
“A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of articles 19(13), 23, 146(1), (2), (4) and (6) and 296 of the Constitution, the purported prima facie finding in respect of three petitions presented for the removal of the Chief Justice and served on the Plaintiff by a letter dated 22nd April, 2025, does not amount to a proper determination of a prima facie case and is therefore null, void and of no effect.”
Justice Torkornoo wants a further declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of articles 19(13), 23, 146(1), (2), (4) and (6) and 296 of the Constitution, the purported finding by the President that a prima facie case has been made against her was arbitrary, capricious, in violation of her right to a fair trial, and therefore unconstitutional, void and of no effect.
Again, she wants a declaration that the purported determination by the President that a prima facie case has been established against her as conveyed in the letter dated April 22, 2025, together with the warrant of her suspension constitute an unjustified attempt to remove her as Head of Ghana’s Judiciary and thus, an undue infringement on the independence of the Judiciary.
She, therefore, wants an order setting aside the warrant for suspension issued by the President to suspend her as Chief Justice of the Republic.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak