Suspended Chief Justice Called 12 Witnesses in Defence – Committee

The committee tasked with investigating the petition for the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo has revealed that she presented twelve witnesses, including experts, in her defence as permitted under the Constitution.

According to the committee, Justice Torkornoo also appeared personally before the panel, gave testimony, and was cross-examined. In total, the committee reviewed nearly 10,000 pages of documentary evidence submitted by both parties. Each side was represented by four lawyers.

The committee emphasized that it refrained from responding publicly, even when false claims were made about its members and their work.

On Monday, September 1, President John Dramani Mahama received the report from the Article 146 Committee of Inquiry, which was set up after three separate petitions called for the removal of the Chief Justice. A prima facie case was established, leading to her suspension on April 22, 2025, in accordance with Article 146(6) of the 1992 Constitution, and after consultation with the Council of State.

The five-member panel was chaired by Supreme Court Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, with members including former Auditor-General Daniel Yaw Domelevo, Major Flora Bazaanura Dalugo of the Ghana Armed Forces, and Professor James Sefah Dzisah of the University of Ghana.

Justice Pwamang, in presenting the report to the President, explained that their mandate was to conduct the inquiry in camera, give the Chief Justice the opportunity to defend herself—either personally or through legal and expert representation—and then make recommendations to the President as required by the Constitution.

He disclosed that in the first petition, the petitioner, Mr. Daniel Ofori, presented thirteen witnesses, while the Chief Justice called twelve in response. After a thorough review of all the evidence, including expert submissions, the committee reached a recommendation which was submitted to the President.

He added that both the second petitioner and the Chief Justice requested an adjournment in respect of the second petition, a request the committee granted. The panel will therefore report on the second and third petitions in due course.