Former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo has filed an application for judicial review at the High Court, contesting her removal from office as Supreme Court Judge by President John Dramani Mahama. The application, titled The Republic v. Attorney-General, Ex Parte Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo, argues that the President’s warrant of removal is “unlawful, null, void, and of no effect”.
Key Points of Contention
– Constitutional Procedure: Torkornoo contends 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.
– Presidential Powers: She is seeking a declaration that the President has no authority to remove a Justice of the Superior Court without adhering to the constitutionally required process.
– Judicial Independence: The case is expected to test the scope of presidential powers in relation to the removal of superior court judges, with far-reaching implications for judicial independence and constitutional governance in Ghana.
Background
Torkornoo’s removal followed recommendations by a committee chaired by Justice Gabriel Pwamang, which found that the grounds of stated misbehaviour under Article 146(1) had been established. However, Torkornoo argues that the process was flawed and violated constitutional safeguards designed to protect judicial independence.
Reliefs Sought
Torkornoo is seeking multiple declarations, including:
– A declaration that jurisdiction to hear any removal petition against a Justice of the Superior Court lies solely with a body established under Article 146(4)
– A declaration that the President’s warrant of removal is unlawful, null, void, and of no effect
The outcome of this case will have significant implications for the Ghanaian judiciary and the country’s constitutional framework.