High Court Dismisses Chief Justice Torkonoo’s Case, Labels It Abuse of Process

The Human Rights Division of the High Court in Accra has thrown out a judicial review application filed by suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo, ruling that the case amounted to an abuse of court process and that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear it.

Delivering the ruling, Justice Kwame Amoako declared that the court could not entertain the matter, marking the failure of a second legal attempt by the suspended Chief Justice to halt her possible removal under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.

The latest ruling follows an earlier constitutional interpretation case Justice Torkonoo filed at the Supreme Court, which is still pending. A prior injunction application to suspend the impeachment proceedings pending that outcome was also dismissed.

Details of the Application

The application, filed on June 9, 2025, sought nine reliefs, including declarations that the Article 146 investigative committee had acted unlawfully. The Chief Justice also asked the court to quash the committee’s proceedings and prevent it from continuing its work without providing authenticated copies of petitions and responses.

Court’s Reasoning

• Justice Amoako grouped the reliefs into two categories:
• Reliefs dismissed as an abuse of court process
• Reliefs dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

1. Abuse of Court Process

The court held that several of the claims raised by Justice Torkonoo were already before the Supreme Court, and re-arguing them at the High Court amounted to duplicative litigation. These included:

Accusations that the investigative committee was proceeding unlawfully due to a lack of authenticated documents;

• A request to halt the committee’s work until such documents were provided;
• Claims that the committee was acting adversarially instead of impartially;
• Allegations that the committee’s composition was unconstitutional.

Justice Amoako ruled that pursuing the same matters in two courts simultaneously was procedurally improper.

2. Lack of Jurisdiction

Other reliefs were dismissed on the grounds that the High Court had no jurisdiction over the matters, as they involved proceedings protected under Article 146(8), which mandates that such committee hearings be held in-camera and insulated from external legal interference. These included:

Allegations of unfair hearing and procedural breaches;

Claims that Justice Torkonoo’s lawyers were barred from representing her;

An application to quash the committee’s proceedings via certiorari.

The court emphasized that the constitutional shield around Article 146 proceedings made them non-justiciable at the High Court level.

This ruling further complicates Justice Torkonoo’s legal battle as she seeks to fight off impeachment efforts while simultaneously challenging the legality of the process.