By Enyichukwu Enemanna
Ghana’s President John Dramani Mahama has removed the Chief Justice from office, following the recommendation of a five-member committee that investigated allegations of misconduct against her.
Gertrude Torkornoo’s removal takes immediate effect. Her sack is in accordance with Article 146(1) of the Ghana’s Constitution.
At least three separate petitions were submitted to the President, accusing the Chief Justice of abuse of office, including the alleged use of public funds for personal travel by her husband and daughter, attempts to influence judicial appointments, and breaches of procurement regulations.
This prompted the inauguration of the investigative committee. At a press conference on 25 June 2025, she denied the allegations against her, accusing the committee of violating her rights during the investigation.
She had approached both the Supreme Court and the High Court to halt her probe, but her applications, including challenges mounted by members of the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP), failed. The courts affirmed that the President had acted within constitutional provisions.
The five-member panel, chaired by Supreme Court Justice Gabriel Pwamang, examined over 10,000 pages of documents and conducted in-camera hearings, calling a total of 25 witnesses, including testimony from the now sacked Chief Justice herself.
“We have reviewed all evidence against the Constitution and relevant laws and arrived at one recommendation without fear or favour on the first petition,” Justice Pwamang noted. He added that further reports on the second and third petitions would be submitted in due course.
In 2024, Chief Justice Torkonoo survived a previous attempt to remove her when a petition to the then-President Nana Akufo-Addo was dismissed. The allegations were deemed not sufficient to justify her removal.
Meanwhile, former Director of the Ghana School of Law, Kwaku Ansa-Asare, noted that the outcome was expected and praised the President for adhering to due process.
He commented, “From the outset, it was clear that the President followed the law; the committee investigated the case thoroughly and heard all sides. The Chief Justice’s own interventions, including the press conference, did not assist her position.”
