The Minority Caucus in Parliament led by its Legal Counsel and Member of Parliament (MP) for Suame Constituency in the Ashanti region, Mr. John Darko, has called on religious and traditional leaders to prevail upon the President to stop any attempt to oust Her Ladyship Chief Justice (CJ), Mrs. Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo from office.
According to the caucus, the petitions seeking Chief Justice Getrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo’s removal are unfounded and failed to meet the constitutional requirements for her removal.
Speaking at an emergency press conference on Wednesday, April 16, 2025, the Legal Counsel for the Minority and MP for Suame stated that sources had revealed to the caucus that the petitions were baseless, necessitating intervention from traditional and religious leaders.
“To our revered traditional leaders and religious leaders, the time to call the president to advise him is now, the time to pray for our country is now. We should not wait until it’s too late,” Mr. Darko said.
The Suame lawmaker cautioned against accepting frivolous petitions, emphasising that such actions could undermine Ghana’s efforts to strengthen its democratic institutions.
“How can any serious country, mindful of its past, and desirous of improving its democratic credentials, entertain such loose petitions and orchestrate the destruction of the last bastion of the pillars of our democracy,” he enquired.
Below is the full statement by the Minority
PRESS CONFERENCE ON THE ATTEMPT TO REMOVE THE CJ
Ladies and gentlemen of the media, sometime in March 2025, H.E the president submitted to the council of state petitions for the removal of the Chief Justice of the Republic Her Lordship Justice Torkonoo. Since the minority became aware of this petition, we have watched with keen interest the processes so far and we are worried, very worried.
In our country’s history, from independence to military takeovers and our experiments with constitutional rules, one of the institutions that have stood firm, asserted its independence and remained nonpartisan is the judiciary.
We are aware that the judiciary’s desire to stay independent has not been an easy ride, from the days of Re-Akoto (1961) where the Supreme Court upheld the Preventive Detention Act, effectively allowing the government to detain individuals without trial, to the State v Otchere (1963) where the then President of Ghana, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah unilaterally declared the decision of the Court null and void and ordered the re-arrest and re-trial of the acquitted persons.
We also remember June 30, 1982, we remember Justices Fred Poku Sarkodee, Cecilia Koranteng-Addow, and Kwadwo Agyei Agyepong, that was an environment in which the judiciary became increasingly caught in the political crossfire, as we are seeing today. The regime at the time viewed the judiciary, including judges and judicial officers, as obstacles to its revolutionary agenda. The government believed at the time, as we are seeing today, that the judicial system was aligned with the old regime, was part of the broader structure of corruption and misrule that needed to be dismantled. That tension culminated in the abduction and murder of three high-ranking judges in June 1982—a tragedy that would shake the country and the independence of the judiciary.
Ladies and gentlemen of the media, the June 30th murders were part of the broader struggle to ensure the PNDC’s control over Ghanaian society, including the legal system. Have we thought of what is happening now? The NDC, which is an offshoot of the PNDC seems to believe that Ghanaians have voted for them to control the Ghanaian society including our legal system. It is a known fact that June 30th was an attempt to silence opposition from the judiciary and to exert control over the legal system.
Ladies and gentlemen of the media, since the inception of Constitution 1992, our judiciary has asserted its independence and this has been demonstrated in cases like the NPP V. IGP, NPP V. AG, where sections of the public order Act was struck down as unconstitutional paving the way for freedom of Assembly, and in the 31st December where the court declared as unconstitutional the use of state resources to celebrate coup d’etat and many others. Our Courts in difficult times have held the balance of power in the cases of Akuffo Addo vrs. Mahama (2013) and Mahama vrs. Akuffo Addo ( 2021).
It is in the light of the above that we see the spurious petition for the removal of the CJ as a serious set back to our democratic journey. The purpose of the petition is to malign the head of the judiciary, orchestrate her removal thereby silencing the judiciary and to finally exert control- the June 30th in mind.
Ladies and gentlemen of the media, the framers of our constitution made each of the arms of government independent and separate yet made provisions for checks and balances that are to ensure respect for each branch of the government. The framers did not provide for executive overreach, overreach drawn from phony allegations such as the one against the CJ.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are told that the petition to remove the CJ stems from allegations that the CJ advised the president to promote a number of judges to the supreme court and presiding over a matter involving the speaker of parliament in an exparte motion.
We are also told that a gentleman committed contempt in-facie curiae and was accordingly punished by the court wants the CJ removed because he has been punished by the court.
The third and I guess the most ridiculous is the alleged financial misappropriation by the CJ in which she is accused of misappropriating some GHC 75,000 or so.
Ladies and gentlemen, under article 146 of the Constitution 1992, the grounds for removal of Justices of the Supreme Court;
(1) A Justice of the Superior Court or a Chairman of the Regional Tribunal shall not be removed from office except for stated misbehaviour or incompetence or on the ground of inability to perform the functions of his office arising from infirmity of body or mind.
How can any serious country, mindful of its past and desirous of improving its democratic credentials, entertain such loose petitions and orchestrate the destruction of the last bastion of the pillars of our democracy?
We are aware of plans for the invocation of article 146 (10) a to suspend the CJ and to appoint certain persons who are know sympathisers of the current administration to act as the Chief Justice.
