)
)
A former Director of the Ghana School of Law, Kwaku Ansa-Asare, has stated that the removal of Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, did not breach any constitutional provisions.
According to him, President John Dramani Mahama acted lawfully, and at no stage in the process was there evidence that the President flouted constitutional rules.
Speaking in an interview with Joy News, Mr Ansa-Asare remarked:
If you allege that your constitutional rights are being violated, and you yourself, as head of the judiciary, do not understand the ramifications of the Chief Justice removal process, you end up shooting yourself in the foot.
ALSO READ: Breaking News: President Mahama removes Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo from office
Kwaku Ansa-Asare
He added that Ghanaians should embrace the decision as a sign of democracy at work:
I’ve said this many times and I don’t think we should be sad about this. We should rather be happy that the Constitution is working. This is democracy, and if the President has to act, every step he takes must be in accordance with the Constitution.
ALSO READ: ALSO READ: Chief Justice removal probe committee submits first report to President Mahama
Mr Ansa-Asare further stressed:
So far, I am yet to be convinced that the President has contravened the constitutional process. No one has been able to pinpoint exactly where President Mahama has gone wrong.
President John Dramani Mahama, in line with Article 146(9) of the 1992 Constitution, removed Chief Justice Torkornoo from office with immediate effect on Monday, 1 September. This followed the submission of a report by the Committee established under Article 146(6) to investigate a petition filed by Ghanaian citizen, Mr Daniel Ofori.
ALSO READ: ‘I’ll resign as MP if NPP loses Akwatia by-election’ – New Juaben South MP vows
A statement signed by the Minister of Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, confirmed that the Committee had found grounds of stated misbehaviour under Article 146(1) and recommended her removal.
The decision, however, has generated mixed reactions, with critics including former Deputy Attorney-General Alfred Tuah Yeboah describing it as politically motivated and a threat to judicial independence.