The Chief Justice of the Republic, Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, has filed a statement of case at the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the ongoing process to remove her from office. In her submission, she accuses President John Dramani Mahama of acting arbitrarily in exercising his discretionary power under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.
The 43-page statement of case, filed by her lawyer, Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame, on Friday, June 27, 2025, lays out detailed arguments and legal reliefs seeking to nullify the President’s actions.
Among the Chief Justice’s key claims are:
- Failure to properly determine a prima facie case: She argues that President Mahama did not conduct a constitutionally compliant prima facie evaluation before initiating the removal process, rendering it null and void.
- Breach of due process and fair hearing rights: The Chief Justice says she was not informed of the petitions or given the opportunity to respond before a prima facie finding was made. She received the petitions only after requesting them on March 27, two days after which they were delivered.
- Violation of constitutional procedures: She contends that the appointment of Justices Gabriel Scott Pwamang and Samuel Adibu-Asiedu to the five-member investigative committee breaches principles of judicial independence and natural justice, as both judges have previously ruled on related matters involving the petitioners.
- Improper composition of the investigative committee: She further challenges the inclusion of Daniel Yao Domelevo, Major Flora Bazwaanura Dalugo, and Professor James Sefah Dzisah, arguing that they failed to subscribe to the judicial oath and are thus not qualified to serve on the committee.
The Chief Justice also insists that under Article 146(8) of the Constitution, she has the right to waive “in camera” proceedings and opt for a public hearing.
Despite a pending suit by MP Vincent Ekow Assafuah seeking to halt the process, President Mahama on April 22 declared that a prima facie case had been established. That same day, the Chief Justice received official notice of her suspension and the formation of the five-member investigative committee.
She describes the entire process as an attempt to unjustly remove her from office and a threat to judicial independence.
Key Reliefs Sought by the Chief Justice Include:
- Declarations that the President’s actions violate Articles 17, 19, 23, 125, 127, 146, 281, 295, and 296 of the Constitution.
- Nullification of the prima facie determination and her suspension as unconstitutional.
- Orders prohibiting Justices Pwamang and Adibu-Asiedu from serving on the committee.
- A declaration that she has a constitutional right to a public hearing before the committee.
- An injunction restraining the committee from proceeding with the inquiry.
The Chief Justice concludes that the process not only breaches the law but also undermines judicial independence and procedural fairness, and must be halted by the Supreme Court.
