Supreme Court Rejects Injunction to Halt Chief Justice’s Removal Petitions

On May 6, the Supreme Court of Ghana dismissed an application filed by Vincent Ekow Assafuah, the Member of Parliament for Old Tafo, which sought to stop the process of hearing three separate petitions aimed at removing Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo from office.

The injunction request was part of an attempt by the opposition MP, a member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), to prevent what he described as a potentially harmful and premature process against the Chief Justice. Representing Assafuah in court was former Attorney General and experienced legal practitioner, Godfred Yeboah Dame.

Read this; University Senior Staff Unions strike ends following Gov’t swift action

The case was reviewed by a five-member panel of the Supreme Court, presided over by Acting Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie. Joining him on the panel were Justices Yonny Kulendi, Amadu Tanko, Henrietta Mensah Bonsu, and Ernest Gaewu.

In a 3-2 decision, the court ruled against the injunction. Justices Baffoe-Bonnie, Kulendi, and Tanko formed the majority and agreed that the application lacked sufficient grounds to justify halting the process. They emphasized the importance of allowing constitutional procedures to unfold, especially in matters concerning high public office.

However, Justices Henrietta Mensah Bonsu and Ernest Gaewu dissented from the majority view. They believed that the application raised valid concerns and should have been considered more carefully before dismissing it outright. Their dissent indicates a split in legal opinion on the sensitivity and implications of the case.

Als0 Read; Any 2025 BECE candidate looking for Apor is not ready for BECE: Education-News Consult Boss

Vincent Assafuah’s legal team had argued that allowing the removal proceedings to move forward could damage the reputation of the Chief Justice and potentially interfere with judicial independence. They called for a temporary halt to any action until the legitimacy and substance of the petitions could be properly reviewed.

Despite the dismissal, the ruling does not mean the petitions will automatically lead to the Chief Justice’s removal. It only clears the way for the process to begin. The petitions will now proceed through the proper constitutional channels for assessment.

For More interesting articles; Click Here