Private legal practitioner, Mr. Kofi Bekai, has stated that the removal of Justice Gertrude Esaaba Torkornoo as a Supreme Court judge wasn’t part of the grounds for which she was removed as Chief Justice.
Reacting to the decision by the former Chief Justice to file a review or a challenge against her removal as a Supreme Court judge, Mr. Bekai explained that it’s an action to test the law.
He clarified that Article 146 of the constitution provides guidelines for removing a Chief Justice, but the removal of a Supreme Court judge was not within the contemplation of the constitution’s framers.
Speaking on Nyankonton Mu Nsem on Rainbow Radio 87.5FM, Mr. Bekai noted that the former Chief Justice is therefore challenging her removal as a judge in court because she believes the process for her removal as Chief Justice doesn’t strip her of her position as a judge of the apex court.
Mr. Bekai added that the former Chief Justice may hold the view that her removal from the office of Chief Justice doesn’t take away her position as a judge, and that’s the point she wishes to challenge.
She has every right to challenge or contest her removal as a judge.
The lawyer further noted that the Attorney General may raise some constitutional matters that could require interpretation by the Supreme Court.
Background
Removed Chief Justice, Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, has filed an application for judicial review at the High Court, challenging the legality of her removal from office as a Supreme Court Judge.
The former judge is praying for the court to grant multiple declarations that the President acted outside the powers conferred by the 1992 Constitution when he issued a removal warrant on September 1, 2025, removing her from the office of Chief Justice and as a Justice of the Superior Court of Judicature.
She argues that the procedure set out under Article 146 of the Constitution, which mandates an inquiry by a properly constituted body before a Superior Court judge can be removed, was not followed.
The case, titled The Republic v. Attorney-General, Ex Parte Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo, cites Articles 23 and 141 of the Constitution and Order 55 of C.I. 47.
She wants the court, among other things,
- Declare that the President has no authority to remove a Justice of the Superior Court without adhering to the constitutionally required process.
- Declare that jurisdiction to hear any removal petition against a Justice of the Superior Court lies solely with a body established under Article 146(4).
- Declare that the President’s warrant of removal is “unlawful, null, void, and of no effect.”
By: Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana
