Justice Gertrude Torkornoo
“No matter how many noises are made, the law is the law and the only answer we can give to all the hand waving is the legal answer, unless we want something else,” is a quote that is famously attributed to sacked Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo.
However, it appears the law was not the law when she appeared before the committee constituted by President John Dramani Mahama to probe three petitions calling for her removal, as many Ghanaians have criticised the government for her removal, suggesting she was unfairly dealt with.
Some have even suggested that the entire process, right from the filing of the petitions, constitution of the committee and the hearing itself is a well-orchestrated scheme to remove her, which has been well executed.
Justice Torkornoo herself had criticised the heavy-handedness of the committee, challenging its approach to the probe, while accusing it of bias and human rights breaches.
There are however, those who are of the opinion that the reasons assigned to the removal are consistent with the dictates of the 1992 Constitution and the President cannot be faulted for his decision, as he was bound by law to follow the recommendation of the committee in line with Article 146(9) of the Constitution.
The decision by the President to remove Justice Torkornoo as the head of the judiciary in line Article 146(9) generated heated arguments from the moment the decision was announced by the Presidency.
What has generated even more criticisms are the three main reasons why the Gabriel Pwamang Committee recommended that she be removed.
Removal
President John Dramani Mahama removed Justice Gertrude Torkornoo from office as the nation’s Chief Justice on Monday, September 1, 2025, following the receipt of the report of a five-member committee that probed a petition filed against her.
She became the first ever Chief Justice to be removed from office following the recommendation of a committee probing allegations of misconduct and misbehaviour.
Prior to her removal, she was suspended by the President on April 22, following the setting up of a five-member committee, after the Council of State made a prima facie finding against her.
Key Findings
The committee made three key findings, including one that Justice Torkornoo caused the Judicial Service to pay travel expenses for her husband and daughter during private holiday trips in 2023, including per diem allowances. The report described this as “avoidable and reckless dissipation of public funds.”
The committee also held that Justice Torkornoo’s handling of the transfer of one Mr. Baiden breached the use of discretionary power under Article 296(a) and (b) of the Constitution, hence constituted misbehaviour.
Finally, the report found that the removed Chief Justice sought to bypass the established process for nominating Justices of the Supreme Court, contrary to precedent set in the Ghana Bar Association case. This was also labeled as misbehaviour.
Unfair ‘Trial’
Many prominent Ghanaians have criticised the removal, warning that it has set a bad precedent which will be repeated by future presidents, an act that will eventually weaken the judiciary.
Chief among the critics is former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo, who has not hidden her displeasure with the decision, insisting that Justice Torkornoo did not get a fair trial.
“She did not get a fair trial. Even though it is not a trial strictly speaking, it was handled as though it were a treason trial,” the former Chief Justice said in an interview with TV3.
The Council of State member stated that the allegations made against Justice Torkornoo are not strong enough to warrant the removal of a Chief Justice, describing the process as a “rigmarole” unworthy of any judge, let alone a Chief Justice.
“They (allegations) lack the gravity that will lead to a grave outcome such as the removal of the head of an institution of justice. I pray to God that no Chief Justice, no judge should ever go through this again,” she stressed.
Madam Akuffo further warned that the episode has weakened confidence in the judiciary as an institution. “My honest and candid view is that this has so weakened the institution of the Judiciary,” she stated.
Mourning Democracy
Minority Leader in Parliament, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, has also criticised the decision, describing it as an assault on democracy.
“We are mourning democracy,” he told journalists in Akwatia in the Eastern Region.
“You claim that you have charges against the Chief Justice, you are done with count one, counts two and three are not concluded, and then you dismiss the person. That is the work of the Pwamang Committee? That is what Pwamang did as a judge?” he queried.
No Surprise
Member of Parliament for Gushegu, Hassan Tampuli, on his part said it is no surprise that the Chief Justice had been removed, noting that many Ghanaians foresaw that outcome.
Speaking on Channel One TV yesterday, he said comments by some key figures in the National Democratic Congress (NDC) about a reset and the need to transform the judiciary gave a clear indication of future happenings.
“I do not think any Ghanaian is surprised by the outcome of the committee’s hearings today, given the manner in which the process began,” he noted.
Dangerous Precedent
Former Deputy Attorney General, Joseph Kpemka, has also described the decision as a dangerous precedent which could be the death of Ghana’s democracy.
“I’m not surprised at all with the way things were done. Some of us foresaw that it was over, and indeed it is over. It’s not surprising at all. Right from day one, the idea has been that when the NDC wins power, the Chief Justice will be removed from office, and that has been done…Perfectly so, it’s being well-orchestrated and well executed,” he told Channel One TV.
No Wrong
In spite of the criticism, there are other high-profile Ghanaians who argue that the removal was done in accordance with the constitution.
Chief among them is Kwaku Ansa-Asare, a former Director of the Ghana School of Law, who stated that the removal demonstrates the robustness of Ghana’s democratic and constitutional systems.
“I don’t think that we should be sad about this; we should rather be happy. We should be happy that the constitution is working. This is a democracy,” he told JoyNews.
He also argued that the President has not contravened the constitution in his handling of the process, adding that “No one has been able to pinpoint exactly where President Mahama has gotten it wrong.”
BY Gibril Abdul Razak