)
)
Two distinguished former Chief Justices of Ghana, Justice Sophia Akuffo (rtd) and Justice Kwasi Anin Yeboah (rtd), have joined a distinguished cohort of legal authorities in providing testimony before the five-member Article 146 committee established by President John Dramani Mahama to examine allegations against the current Chief Justice, Justice Gertrude Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, according to sources with knowledge of the proceedings.
The proceedings have attracted testimony from several pre-eminent figures in Ghana's legal establishment, as reported by Asaaseradio online.
Among the notable witnesses who have appeared before the committee is Nana Dr S K B Asante, a distinguished Ghanaian statesman, legal practitioner, and paramount chief of Asokore Asante in the Ashanti Region.
Dr Asante holds particular significance in this matter, as he served as chairman of the committee of experts responsible for drafting the 1992 constitution.
MUST READ: African boxers who have won Olympic medals
Additionally, Justice Jones Dotse, a retired Supreme Court justice, has provided testimony to the committee.
The witness list further includes Samuel Okudzeto, a former Council of State member and distinguished legal luminary with over 65 years of professional standing at the Ghana Bar, representing decades of accumulated legal expertise and institutional knowledge.
Ghana Bar Association Presents Institutional Evidence
In a significant development, the executive leadership of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) made a formal appearance before the committee to present factual evidence and address the allegations under investigation by the Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang-led committee.
The GBA delegation was represented by President Efua Ghartey, Vice-President Victoria Nana Ama Barth, and Executive Secretary Kwaku Gyau Baffour.
READ ALSO: Top 10 Best Universities in Africa According to QS World University Rankings 2026
The Bar Association presented comprehensive documentation regarding their institutional work on Supreme Court expansion, providing contextual evidence relevant to the proceedings.
Constitutional Interpretation and Precedent
During his testimony, Nana Dr S K B Asante provided an authoritative interpretation regarding the constitutional provisions at issue.
He emphasised that Article 146 was not incorporated into the constitution to facilitate the removal of a Chief Justice for routine administrative decisions or personal matters such as vacation arrangements with family members.
Drawing upon comparative constitutional law, Dr Asante noted that Ghana's approach aligns with established Commonwealth precedent, where Article 146 (1) of the 1992 constitution restricts grounds for removal to circumstances demonstrating a Chief Justice's inability to perform official duties.
Former Chief Justices Corroborate Administrative Practices
The testimonies provided by the former Chief Justices and other distinguished legal figures substantiated the current Chief Justice's response to the petitions submitted by three complainants to the President.
These petitions were subsequently forwarded to the Chief Justice by the Office of the President for her response after she requested copies of the allegations.
READ MORE: 12 High-Paying Jobs in Ghana You Can Do Without a University Degree
According to sources familiar with the committee proceedings per Asaaseradio online, the Chief Justice's legal representatives sought specific information from the former Chief Justices regarding the administrative benefits and responsibilities associated with the office during their respective tenures.
The committee's sitting said, as quoted by Asaaseradionline:
The lawyers of the Chief Justice solicited from the two former chief justices who appeared before the committee, for example, [information] about the travel benefits that came with their office when they occupied the position of Chief Justice
The former chief justices provided consistent testimony establishing precedent for the current practices under scrutiny.
READ FURTHER: Business Ideas for Women Entrepreneurs in 2025: 10 Powerful Ventures to Start
The former chief justices both pointed out before the committee that they enjoyed the same benefits that the current Chief Justice has been accused of by one of the petitioners.
On the issue of assigning cases to judges and specific courts, the two former chief justices indicated before the committee that these matters were part of the usual administrative responsibilities of every individual occupying that office
This testimony establishes a pattern of consistent administrative practice across multiple Chief Justice tenures, suggesting that the current allegations may lack the novelty or impropriety suggested by the petitioners.
Background: Historic Suspension Amid Constitutional Controversy
On 22 April 2025, President John Mahama suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo following a preliminary investigation that, in consultation with the Council of State, found sufficient grounds to initiate an inquiry into her conduct under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.
This unprecedented move marked the first time in Ghana’s history that a sitting Chief Justice had been suspended. The decision stemmed from three separate petitions alleging misconduct, filed by Kingsley Agyei, convener of Shining Stars of Ghana; lawyer and Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Ayamga Yakubu Akolgo; and Daniel Ofori.
READ THIS: How to survive and thrive in Ghana without borrowing from MTN MoMo or quick loan apps
The allegations include tampering with court records and misuse of public funds, with specific claims of financial misappropriation amounting to approximately GH¢261,890 and US$30,000 during foreign trips. Two additional petitions for her removal have since been lodged.
Justice Torkornoo, in response, has announced her intention to address the nation on June 25 regarding the suspension and the ongoing proceedings. She has also cited three reasons for breaking her silence on the removal process.
The suspension has sparked sharp constitutional debate, dividing opinion on the scope of presidential powers. Justice Torkornoo has challenged the decision, filing an injunction application with the Supreme Court against the Attorney General and the Committee of Inquiry, arguing that her suspension was unconstitutional.
While she sought relief, the Supreme Court upheld the President’s decision in May 2025. The matter has also gained international attention, with reports confirming that Justice Torkornoo has escalated her challenge to the West African regional court.