Vincent Ekow Assafuah, Member of Parliament for Old Tafo, has filed a lawsuit at the Supreme Court, challenging the President’s handling of a petition seeking the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Sackey Torkornoo. The suit raises constitutional concerns over the procedural steps taken in the matter.
Legal Challenge
Mr. Assafuah argues that the process did not follow constitutional requirements, particularly regarding the Chief Justice’s right to be notified and respond before any such petition is considered.
In his writ, Assafuah is seeking declarations that:
- The President is mandated under Articles 146(1), (2), (4), (6), and (7), 23, 57(3), and 296 of the Constitution to notify the Chief Justice of any removal petition and obtain her comments before consulting the Council of State.
- The failure to notify the Chief Justice before initiating the Council of State consultation amounts to an unjustified interference with judicial independence, as protected under Articles 127(1) and (2).
- The process violates the fundamental right to a fair hearing under Articles 23 and 296, making the consultation process for the Chief Justice’s removal null and void.
Constitutional Context
Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution outlines the procedure for the removal of a Chief Justice, including the President’s role in consulting the Council of State and appointing a committee to investigate such petitions. Assafuah’s suit seeks clarity on whether the Chief Justice must be given an opportunity to respond before the process is triggered.
This case raises broader concerns about due process in addressing petitions against high-ranking judicial officials and the need to ensure that constitutional provisions governing such matters are strictly followed.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments on the matter in the coming weeks.
