Accra, Ghana – April 2025:
Ghana’s judiciary is under intense national scrutiny as multiple petitions have been filed seeking the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo. The petitions, recently forwarded to the Council of State by President John Dramani Mahama, have triggered constitutional procedures and ignited widespread political and civic discourse.
What Sparked the Petitions?
According to reports, at least three petitions were submitted to the presidency, accusing the Chief Justice of various alleged misconducts. These include:
- Alleged favoritism and improper influence in the appointment of judges to higher courts.
- Accusations of administrative interference and procedural irregularities in certain high-profile cases.
- Claims of financial mismanagement involving state-sponsored official travel.
While the Office of the Chief Justice has not publicly addressed each allegation in detail, insiders confirm that a formal written response has been submitted as part of the due process.
Constitutional Process for Removal
Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, under Article 146, outlines a detailed and independent process for the removal of a Chief Justice or any superior court judge:
- Initiation: A petition is submitted to the President alleging stated misbehavior, incompetence, or inability to perform duties.
- Council of State Review: The President forwards the petition to the Council of State, which advises on whether a prima facie case exists.
- Formation of Investigative Committee: If grounds are established, a five-member committee—comprising two Supreme Court judges and three other prominent citizens—must be appointed to investigate.
- Outcome: The committee’s recommendation is binding on the President.
Legal experts warn that this process, although constitutionally mandated, must be handled delicately to preserve judicial independence and uphold democratic principles.
Political and Civil Reactions
The petitions have generated sharp reactions across Ghana’s political landscape. Members of the opposition have questioned the timing and motives behind the petitions, suggesting they may be politically driven. Civil society organizations have also weighed in, calling for transparency and the strict adherence to constitutional procedures.
“Judicial integrity is the cornerstone of our democracy. Any threat to that should be approached with caution, not chaos,” noted legal analyst Dr. Kwame Agyeman.
Meanwhile, public interest in the case continues to grow, with the Supreme Court expected to hear matters relating to the petitions on May 6, 2025.
Implications for Ghana’s Democracy
This development could redefine the relationship between the executive and judiciary in Ghana. Legal scholars argue that how this matter is resolved could set a significant precedent—either reinforcing judicial autonomy or revealing vulnerabilities in the balance of power.
As the nation watches closely, all eyes remain on the Council of State and the anticipated investigative committee. In the coming weeks, Ghana’s commitment to rule of law and constitutionalism will be tested like never before.
About The Author
