The Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkonoo, has officially written to President John Dramani Mahama requesting copies of the petitions calling for her removal from office.
In a letter addressed to both the President and members of the Council of State on Thursday, March 27, 2025, Justice Torkonoo asked for a seven-day period to review the petitions once she receives them.
This will allow her to provide an appropriate response before a Committee of Inquiry is established to investigate the petitions.
“I am by this letter humbly and respectfully asking His Excellency the President and eminent members of the Council of State to forward the petition against me to me, and allow me at least seven days after receipt of same, to provide my response to you, which response can then form part of the material that you conduct the consultations anticipated under 146 (6) before the possible setting up of a Committee of Inquiry under article 146(7),” the letter read.
The Chief Justice’s response came two days after President Mahama forwarded three petitions calling for her removal to the Council of State for further action.
In her response, she noted that despite the President’s action, she has not received or been given copies of the petitions sent to the Council of State, which are expected to form the basis for her removal from office.
She referenced Article 146(1) of the Constitution, which stipulates that when a petition for the removal of a Supreme Court judge, including the Chief Justice, is received, the Chief Justice is required to bring the petition to the attention of the accused judge and seek their response before any further action is taken.
“This is the right afforded every citizen in justice delivery, and it is provided for in article 146 procedures. In my time as a Chief Justice, I have handled five such petitions for removal of superior court judges, and heard from them before determining whether a prima facie case has been made against them to merit the setting up of the investigative committee provided for under article 146(4),” Chief Justice Torknoo insisted.
Justice Torkonoo further pointed out that in the case of Agyei-Twum v Attorney-General and Akwettey [2005-2006] SCGLR 732, the Supreme Court ruled that before the President consults with the Council of State regarding a petition to remove a Chief Justice, a combination of evidence from the petition and the Chief Justice’s response is necessary to determine whether a prima facie case has been established for the removal.
“Respectfully, in the case of the Chief Justice, please allow me to submit that it is the combination of the evidence in the petition, and the response of the Chief Justice, that provides the material for consultation between His Excellency the President and eminent members of the Council of State under article 146(6),” it said.
“These two sources serve to guide whether a prima facie case has been established, such that a Committee of Inquiry should be set up under article 146 (7) to inquire into whether the Chief Justice may be removed from office. This is the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Agyei-Twum v Attorney-General and Akwettey [2005-2006] SCGLR 732,” the letter added.
