Ghana’s Attorney General, Dr. Dominic Akuritinga Ayine, has responded to the Bar Council of England and Wales (BCEW) and the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) regarding their call to reinstate suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo.
In a statement released on August 15, Dr. Ayine emphasized that Ghana’s constitutional framework provides robust safeguards for judicial independence and procedural fairness.
He highlighted the processes and procedures involved in the removal of the Chief Justice or superior court judges, as outlined in the Ghanaian Constitution.
Dr. Ayine’s response aims to educate the BCEW and CLA on the intricacies of Ghana’s constitutional processes, underscoring the country’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and judicial independence.
“The Government notes the joint statement’s reliance on the Commonwealth (Latimer House) Principles. Ghana’s constitutional framework is not only consistent with these Principles but also provides robust safeguards for judicial independence and procedural fairness.
“The process under Article 146 of the Constitution ensures that the President does not act unilaterally but only upon the advice and findings of constitutionally mandated actors and independent investigative bodies. The President does not participate in the inquiry and, by Article 146(9), is bound by the findings of the inquiry committee.
“Regarding concerns about representation and participation in the proceedings, the Attorney-General is confident that the inquiry committee – established under Article 146(6) and chaired by the Chief Justice’s peer (a Supreme Court Justice) – is acting within the bounds of the law. We also believe that the Chief Justice, like any other Superior Court Justice subject to such proceedings, receives all the protections available under Ghanaian law, including the right to legal representation of choice, and the right to fully respond to the allegations.
“As to suggestions of delay or procedural impropriety, it is important to emphasise that the Committee is wholly independent of the executive arm of Government and conducts its work in accordance with its own procedural rules, consistent with the constitutional principle of legality, fairness and reasonableness.
“By the provisions of Article 146, all proceedings related to the removal of superior court justices are held in camera, and the President, like all other citizens, is not privy to them. However, it is unrealistic and unbelievable that an inquiry committee – with two of the suspended Chief Justice’s peers, one serving as chairperson – would deprive her of the safeguards of due process, particularly when it is public knowledge that legal counsel (comprising distinguished legal academics and practitioners) has continuously and ably represented her throughout the hearings.
“Bearing in mind that the proceedings commenced only on May 15, 2025, any suggestion of undue delay is, to put it mildly, grossly misplaced.
“It must, therefore, be emphasised that there has been no constitutional breach or executive overreach in the consideration of the three petitions. Applications for interlocutory injunctions and judicial review brought before both the Supreme Court and the High Court by the suspended Chief Justice and her associates in an effort to restrain or halt the inquiry committee proceedings have been duly considered and dismissed by the courts as lacking in merit. We feel considerably reluctant to mention that the sound (including the very words) of the BCEW and the CLA joint statement vividly clones the dismissed grounds which Her Ladyship, Justice Torkornoo, C.J., and her associates canvassed before the Supreme Court and the High Court.
READ: Reinstate suspended CJ immediately, give her fair hearing – Commonwealth lawyers
“It is also important to mention that Justice Torkornoo, C.J., has presented similar arguments in her case before the ECOWAS Court, which the Government of Ghana is defending on behalf of its citizens.
“The Government of Ghana remains strongly committed to maintaining the independence of the judiciary, separation of powers, and the rule of law. Any suggestion otherwise is unfounded and risks distorting a constitutional process that is being conducted fairly, transparently and in accordance with the law.
“Finally, neither the Latimer House Principles nor the constitution prohibits the suspension of a Chief Justice, once a prima facie determination of misconduct or misbehaviour has been made. The suspension will, therefore, remain in effect until the inquiry committee completes its work and submits its report, to which His Excellency, the President will adhere.
Source: Starrfm.com.gh
