The government has firmly denied allegations that the ongoing process to remove suspended Chief Justice, Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, is politically motivated.
Minister for Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, addressing the media shortly after Justice Torkornoo’s remarks, dismissed her claims as baseless and misleading. He stressed that the government has no hand in the process beyond its constitutionally mandated role.
“Her Ladyship the Chief Justice all but insinuated that there was some political agenda at play to oust her and that this process is a result of same, let me place on record without fear or contradiction and let me be clear that no such political agenda exist.”
He explained that the removal process is being carried out strictly in line with Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, which outlines the steps for investigating and removing judges and other public officeholders.
This follows public comments made by Justice Torkornoo during a presser on Wednesday, June 25, where she described the impeachment process as unconstitutional, flawed, and part of a calculated political effort to oust her from office.
She alleged that the proceedings lacked transparency, breached her constitutional rights, and were intended to intimidate her into resignation.
Justice Torkornoo, who is facing multiple petitions for her removal, addressing the press expressed concerns over irregularities in the process, including the refusal to disclose specific charges, denial of access to documents, and the choice of Adu Lodge—a location she believes carries historical trauma for the judiciary—as the venue for the hearings.
She maintained that stepping down would only legitimise what she described as an unlawful and politically driven process.
Her concerns come just days after the Supreme Court struck out a supplementary affidavit she filed in support of her attempt to halt the impeachment process.
READ: Every step of my removal unlawful — Suspended CJ
In the affidavit, Justice Torkornoo described the treatment she has received as degrading and unfair. She also claimed the entire process is politically motivated and aimed at forcing her out unjustly.
However, a five-member panel of the Supreme Court ruled against her, agreeing with an objection from Deputy Attorney General, Justice Srem Sai, who argued that her affidavit disclosed confidential details about the removal process — something strictly prohibited under the Constitution.
The Constitution requires that such proceedings be held behind closed doors to protect their integrity.
Her lawyer, former Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame, disagreed with the ruling, arguing that the affidavit was only filed in court and wasn’t shared with the public, so it didn’t break any rules.
Still, the Supreme Court held that the affidavit breached the confidentiality of the process and struck it out.
Source: Ghana/Starrfm.com.gh/Hamdia Mohammed
