Professor Kwaku Asare, a legal luminary and a Fellow at the Ghana Center for Democratic Development (CDD Ghana) has cautioned the public not to interpret the actions taken against Justice Torkornoo as an attack on the Judiciary.
Prof. Kwaku Asare noted that Ghana as a democratic state values judicial integrity and therefore the reason the Chief Justice is being held “accountable” for her alleged actions.
In a Facebook post on May 3, 2025, he called for institutions in the country to be strengthened so as not to fester “untouchable individuals”.
“Let us end the fiction that holding the Chief Justice accountable for her actions amounts to an attack on the judiciary. It is precisely because we value judicial integrity that we insist on accountability. The country deserves strong institutions—not untouchable individuals.
“Hands off the Constitution—not just Gertrude. Truth stands as Bacchus teaches us, and as my Viking friend undoubtedly agrees, regardless of how sentiment may seek to cloud constitutional clarity,” he wrote.
President Mahama has suspended Gertrude Torkornoo as the Chief Justice after establishing a prima facie case against her in consultation with the Council of State following three petitions for her removal.
The President has also established a five member committee to look into the petitions against Gertrude Torkonoo. Justice Paul Baffoe Bonnie is now the Acting Chief Justice pending the appointment of a substantive Chief Justice.
However, the Minority Caucus and the Ghana Bar Association have opposed the suspension of Justice Torkonoo, arguing that the President’s action is unconstitutional and must be revoked immediately.
The GBA declared the suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo as unconstitutional. This was a key point in a statement released at the GBA’s 2025 Mid-Year Conference in Accra.
They believe that President John Dramani Mahama did not follow the correct legal procedures. Specifically, the GBA states that the President did not publish an official document (Constitutional Instrument, Statutory Instrument, or Regulation) to explain how he came to his decision.
But Prof. Asare in a strong-worded statement on Facebook April 29, disagreed with the GBA.
He said the GBA’s call for revocation lacks legal merit and risks politicizing the judiciary itself, accusing the Association of passing a prejudicial comment.
“The GBA, in calling for an end to prejudicial commentary, has issued one of the most prejudicial declarations yet. By flatly declaring the Chief Justice’s suspension unconstitutional—without legal basis, without reference to binding precedent, and while the Article 146 process is still underway—the GBA does exactly what it warns others not to do: it passes judgment prematurely,” he noted.
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Instagram
Google+
YouTube
LinkedIn
RSS