Sophia Akuffo
Former Chief Justice, Sophia Akuffo, has expressed deep displeasure with the committee which probed the petition that led to the removal of Justice Gertrude Torkornoo as Chief Justice by President John Dramani Mahama.
Of particular concern to her is the leakage of her appearance before the committee which, according to Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, must conduct the probe in-camera thereby keeping its proceedings far from the public eye.
Social media and mainstream media were splattered with multiple articles and commentaries about the retired former Chief Justice and other former Supreme Court judges appearing before the five-member Justice Gabriel Pwamang Committee to testify in favour of Justice Torkornoo.
The leakage occurred in the face of the Supreme Court’s strong opposition to Justice Torkornoo calling for a public hearing, after deciding to waive her right to an in-camera hearing.
Prior to Madam Sophia Akuffo and others’ appearance on behalf of their fellow judge, there was literally nothing about the identity of the individuals who appeared before the committee to testify on behalf of the petitioner, Daniel Ofori.
This decision has infuriated the former Chief Justice, who suggested that the committee, perhaps, failed to protect itself, particularly when there was no media in sight when she appeared before the committee.
Speaking to TV3, Madam Akuffo described the situation as unfortunate, indicating that it was done in bad faith.
“It was supposed to be in-camera. Everything was confidential so, I go to an in-camera process to give evidence and then it is out there in the public domain. Approbation and Reprobation, that’s the way I see it,” she told the host.
She further indicated that “So, the committee wither, it was not protecting itself because as I was walking into that building I didn’t see any paparazzi on sight nor did I see any person surreptitiously taking pictures or anything like that.”
“So, how did it got to the press that I had given evidence? I think that is wrong and it was in bad faith; and it was in bad form and it was not in consonance and due regard that is dictated by an in-camera process,” she fumed.
Not Ashamed
Notwithstanding the leakage, the retired Chief Justice has stated that she is not ashamed of testifying on behalf of Justice Torkornoo, saying she would do it again, if she had to.
This is in spite of the outrage she felt when her attention was drawn to social media updates regarding her appearance before the committee.
“You can imagine the outrage I felt when I saw something on social media sent to me, revealing facts that I’m not in the least bit ashamed of. If I had to do it again, I would. The fact that I had gone to give evidence before the committee was online. How did that get there? And it wasn’t only me. I’m not going to repeat that unbecoming behaviour by mentioning the other names that were listed,” she said.
She queried whether Justice Torkornoo was not entitled to witnesses just as the petitioner was allowed to call witnesses who testified for him.
“Isn’t someone entitled to have witnesses on their behalf? Come to think of it, we don’t even know who testified on behalf of the petitioners, so why are those who testified for the respondents being thrown to the rabid dogs?” she added.
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.
Unfair ‘Trial’
Madam Akuffo, who has not hidden her displeasure with the removal, insisted that Justice Torkornoo did not get a fair trial, adding that the decision has weakened the judiciary.
“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.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak