Former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo has filed a formal reply at the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice in Abuja, contesting the government’s defence in her case over removal from office.
In her submission, Torkornoo disputes claims by the Attorney General that proper procedures were followed in handling three petitions against her in 2025.
She argues that the President and the Committee investigating the petitions failed to provide her with copies of the alleged prima facie determinations before acting, in breach of Article 146 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution.
Procedural breaches
Torkornoo contends that the inquiry panel only partially heard one petition, adjourned the remaining two without notice, and submitted its report to the President while denying her the opportunity to submit or adopt written responses.
She describes the hearings as “a charade”, citing the lack of cross-examination and withholding of vital documents.
The former Chief Justice also challenged the composition of the panel, noting that Justices Pwamang and Asiedu had previously adjudicated cases related to the petitions.
She said their involvement violated the principle of nemo judex in causa sua—no one should judge a case in which they have a personal interest.
Leaked petitions?
Her filing further rejects the government’s assertion that she leaked petitions or influenced related Supreme Court cases and calls into question the validity of the President’s warrant of suspension issued on April 22, 2025.
Torkornoo is seeking recognition of procedural violations, restoration of entitlements, and compensation for reputational, financial, and professional harm.
The filing was prepared by prominent Nigerian human rights lawyers Femi and Funmi Falana and their team.
Torkornoo has argued that her removal without due process threatens judicial independence and undermines public confidence in Ghana’s judiciary.
A-G’s Defence
The Attorney General had mounted a strong defence for the President and the Council of State, indicating that they were not required to issue a reasoned legal opinion when making a prima facie determination on petitions seeking the removal of Justice Gertrude Torkornoo.
Deputy Attorney General Justice Srem-Sai argued that a prima facie determination under Article 146 of the Constitution is a policy decision, not a judicial one, and is therefore not subject to judicial review.
He said the absence of a constitutional instrument to guide the process does not invalidate the president’s actions.
Source: asaaseradio.com
