Ghana’s Chief Justice was removed by President John Mahama for two simple reasons: She complied with the Judicial Service’s travel policy and exercised administrative powers lawfully granted to her by the Constitution. That is all. And that is precisely why every Ghanaian should be alarmed.
The letter from the Secretary to the President listed three supposed “sins” of the Chief Justice:
1. She breached the travel policy of the Judicial Service.
2. She transferred a member of staff.
3. She suggested judges for promotion.
On these astonishingly trivial grounds, Ghana’s highest judicial officer was removed from office.
But the rot runs deeper. These “sins” were determined by a biased committee, a committee that denied the Chief Justice basic rights guaranteed under the rules of natural justice. The chairman of that committee had previously ruled in favour of the petitioner in a Supreme Court case in which the Chief Justice had been in dissent. That is a textbook conflict of interest.
The committee adjourned to allow her to file her address, only to turn around, without notice, and hand over its recommendations to the President. That was not justice; it was ambush adjudication.
The President may claim he was bound to act upon the committee’s report once it was submitted. But here lies the great mystery: why has the President not released the committee’s report? Why is it being hidden from the very person it condemns, and from the public whose justice system it shakes to its core?
Is the committee above the Constitution? Above the law? The refusal to release the report is proof enough of what it contains: a flimsy, politically motivated justification for a predetermined outcome.
The Chief Justice’s first alleged offence was her “enjoyment” of the Judicial Service’s travel policy. Let us be clear: there was no reckless spending, no embezzlement, no irregular expenditure. The Chief Justice is not even the spending officer of the Judicial Service. That role belongs to the Judicial Secretary, who duly provided answers to the Auditor-General on all expenditures in question.
The Auditor-General accepted those explanations. There was no disallowance, no surcharge, no adverse finding. Even a former Auditor-General sitting on the committee could not bring himself to recognise this simple fact, preferring instead to indulge in social media commentary.
To this day, not one cedi of the Judicial Service’s expenditure under the Chief Justice’s tenure has been disallowed. So how does a Chief Justice lose her job over spending she did not authorise, that the Auditor-General approved, and that Parliament has not questioned?
The second charge? She transferred a Judicial Service staff member. But context matters. The transferred staffer was a prime suspect in a case involving records tampering in the high-profile Gyakye Quayson case. Following investigations by the Judicial Council’s disciplinary committee, the Chief Justice, as administrative head, approved the transfer to protect the integrity of the courts.
Is this now the standard? That a Chief Justice who enforces discipline should be punished for it? That every routine transfer of staff will henceforth risk a constitutional crisis?
The third ground for her removal borders on absurdity. She allegedly recommended that the President consider promoting certain judges who had distinguished themselves. This was an earlier matter already dismissed as unmeritorious.
Every Chief Justice in Ghana’s history has made similar suggestions; it is part of the judicial process. Her recommendations never even reached the President because of timing, not because they were improper. When did suggesting merit become misconduct?
None of the grounds cited meet the constitutional threshold for removal, no “stated misbehaviour”, no “incompetence”. What we are witnessing is not the rule of law but the weaponisation of procedure to remove an independent-minded Chief Justice.
The report must be released. The people deserve to read it, to see for themselves the weakness of the case.
Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo deserves commendation for her courage in turning to the very courts she once led to challenge this injustice. She is not fighting for herself alone but for the independence of Ghana’s judiciary and for the sanctity of constitutional governance.
Madam Chief Justice, soldier on. The truth will prevail. History is always kinder to those who stand by principle than to those who abuse power.
Because to destroy a Chief Justice on these frivolous, manufactured grounds is not just unconscionable, it is a coup against the Constitution itself.
#ReleaseTheReport
The writer, Kow Essuman, served as Secretary to then-President Akufo-Addo. Prior to that, he was the first Legal Counsel to President Akufo-Addo. Kow Essuman is an international lawyer in every sense, specializing in corporate and commercial litigation and arbitration. He is qualified to practise in three different jurisdictions: England and Wales, New York State, and Ghana.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the position of Starrfm.com.gh or its management.
