In a swift and comprehensive response, Thaddeus Sory, representing one of the petitioners in the Chief Justice removal proceedings, has challenged Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo’s legal arguments and procedural complaints. The lawyer’s “She Said, We Say” analysis systematically questions the Chief Justice’s understanding of established constitutional law and judicial precedents.
Challenging the Chief Justice’s Claims
Sory’s response raises serious questions about the Chief Justice’s grasp of fundamental legal principles governing Article 146 proceedings. The document cites multiple Supreme Court cases and constitutional provisions that appear to contradict the Chief Justice’s public statements. Some of the key points of contention include:
– Public Hearing: Sory argues that the Supreme Court has affirmed that Article 146 proceedings must be held in camera, citing cases such as Justice Dery v Tiger Eye PI and Agyei Twum v A-G.
– Supplementary Affidavit: Sory questions the Chief Justice’s complaint about the striking out of her supplementary affidavit, pointing out that she herself has ordered similar actions in previous cases.
– Rights Violation: Sory argues that the Chief Justice’s rights were not violated, as she was given the opportunity to respond to allegations and provide evidence.
– Committee’s Procedure: Sory challenges the Chief Justice’s claims about the committee’s procedure, citing cases that establish the committee’s discretion in determining its own procedure.
A Direct Legal Challenge
Sory’s response represents a direct legal challenge to the Chief Justice’s characterization of the removal process and her claims of procedural violations. The document concludes by questioning the Chief Justice’s depth of the Chief Justice’s understanding of legal principles and her fitness to lead the judiciary.
The response from Thaddeus Sory has sparked a national conversation about the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. As the situation unfolds, it is clear that the Chief Justice’s leadership and the integrity of the judicial system are under intense scrutiny. The question on everyone’s mind is: what’s next for Ghana’s judiciary? ghanatalk.com