By Nana Karikari, Senior Global Affairs Correspondent
The immediate removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo by President John Mahama, a direct consequence of a constitutional committee’s recommendation, marks a tectonic shift in Ghana’s political and legal landscape. This event is not just a high-profile ouster; it is a profound legal, social, and human event that serves as a powerful litmus test for a nation’s commitment to both accountability and judicial independence. The decision fundamentally challenges established norms of power and will shape the country’s future for decades to come.
Political Battle Lines Drawn
The political implications of this decision are immense. The ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) hails the removal as a victory for good governance, framing it as a necessary, brave step to sanitize the judiciary. A spokesperson for the NDC, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, has defended the president’s actions, stating they were not politically motivated and that the president acted in full accordance with the constitution. This message resonates with a public tired of corruption and frames the NDC as the party of accountability.
In stark contrast, the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) condemns the move as a political witch hunt. A senior NPP official, who spoke off the record, called it a “dangerous assault on the independence of the judiciary,” adding, “This is not about justice. It is about seizing control of a key institution before the next election.” The timing of the decision—just months before a general election—has turned the event into a central campaign theme, with both major parties weaponizing the narrative to court voters.
A New Precedent for Judicial Accountability
The removal was based on Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, which provides the grounds and procedure for removing a Chief Justice. The committee’s finding of “stated misbehavior” against the Chief Justice, based on allegations related to the administrative transfer of two cases, sets a powerful precedent. However, the process has faced significant legal challenges.
In a public address made during the inquiry before her final removal, Chief Justice Torkornoo stated, “Every step of the removal process being undertaken against me is being done in a manner that breaks every rule on how justice is delivered in our country.” Legal experts have pointed to the public nature of the proceedings, arguing it violated the constitutional requirement for in-camera hearings, a precedent set by the Supreme Court in the landmark Agyei Twum v. The Attorney-General case. Her legal
team went a step further, filing a lawsuit against the Republic of Ghana at the ECOWAS Community Court in Nigeria, challenging the legality of her suspension and its implications for judicial independence. This unprecedented move has raised a critical question about the scope of regional court authority over a sovereign nation’s internal constitutional affairs, creating a unique legal question for all of West Africa.
The Ghana Bar Association and the Commonwealth Lawyers Association expressed concern prior to the final ouster, calling for her reinstatement. Yet, the legal community is not monolithic. The Lawyers in Search of Democracy (LINSOD), a group of Ghanaian lawyers, has publicly defended the president’s actions, stating they are in line with the constitution and the Agyei Twum precedent. This debate highlights the deep divisions within Ghana’s legal fraternity. Future public officials will now face intense scrutiny, knowing that a constitutional process can lead to their removal. This is a monumental shift in Ghana’s legal landscape.
A Human Tragedy and a Call for Justice
Beyond the headlines, a powerful human story unfolds. Justice Torkornoo’s long and distinguished career is now defined by her dramatic exit. A retired Supreme Court justice, who requested anonymity, said, “This is a sad day for the institution. Regardless of the findings, it is a personal tragedy for a woman who gave her life to the law.”
The public, however, is less concerned with legal formality and more with the broader principle of justice. “I don’t know the law,” one citizen commented on social media, “but if the law says she did wrong, then she must be held to account, just like any of us.” This sentiment reflects a popular demand for accountability and a powerful desire to see no one, no matter how high up, as being above the law.
A Reckoning for Democracy
The ouster of the Chief Justice triggers a constitutional mandate for a new appointment. According to Ghana’s constitution, the President must now, in consultation with the Council of State, appoint a new Chief Justice, subject to parliamentary approval. This process, itself a political minefield, will be the next critical test of the nation’s democratic institutions. The perception of this appointment—whether it is seen as a partisan selection or a consensus-driven choice—will be key to restoring public and international confidence in the judiciary.
Notably, neither Chief Justice Torkornoo nor the Supreme Court has issued an immediate public statement or reaction to the news of the ouster. This silence, in itself, is a significant part of the unfolding story. It underscores the gravity of the event and the caution being exercised by key institutions. Meanwhile, the global community is watching.
Ghana’s long-held reputation as a democratic beacon in West Africa is on the line. International bodies and foreign investors will be keenly observing how the nation navigates this crisis, as a stable and independent judiciary is a cornerstone of economic and political stability. Statements from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the United Nations, issued during the inquiry period, urged all parties to respect the rule of law and due process, signaling that the international community considers this more than a domestic issue. The specter of a politicized judiciary could also deter crucial foreign direct investment, potentially impacting Ghana’s economic stability.
The public mood is already one of deep skepticism. According to the latest Afrobarometer survey, public trust in the judiciary has fallen sharply over the past decade. Furthermore, the Mo Ibrahim Foundation’s governance index shows a steep decline in judicial independence in recent years. This crisis, therefore, does not happen in a vacuum; it is the culmination of years of eroding public and institutional confidence.
This entire saga also carries a poignant historical weight. For many Ghanaians, the sanctity of judicial independence is a hard-won principle, a lesson learned from the dark days of military rule when three High Court judges were tragically murdered in 1982. The event stands as a grim reminder of the vulnerability of the judiciary when checks and balances fail. The current crisis, while constitutional, evokes the deepest fears about the potential for political interference to undermine the rule of law. The future of Ghana’s democracy hangs in the balance, a question of whether the nation will choose accountability through a fair and transparent process or risk a dangerous return to a more politicized past.
