The Human Rights Division of the Accra High Court has ordered the suspended Chief Justice, Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, to ensure service of her affidavit in opposition to an application by the Attorney General (AG) seeking to strike out her legal action.
Presiding Judge, Justice Kwame Amoako, issued the directive after observing that there was no proof on record confirming service of the affidavit, which was filed on July 11, 2025.
“There is no proof of service of the affidavit in opposition to the Respondents/Applicants’ motion for an order to strike out,” the court noted.
“Let the said affidavit in opposition be served and service thereof duly proved.”
Justice Torkornoo, who is currently suspended from office, filed a human rights action challenging the legality and process of her suspension. Her suit alleges constitutional violations and seeks judicial review of the disciplinary proceedings against her.
Her suspension followed multiple petitions and the subsequent formation of a five-member investigative committee, set up under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution to probe allegations brought against her.
However, in response, the Attorney General filed a counter-motion on July 1, asking the court to strike out the Chief Justice’s application, arguing that the matter is already before the Supreme Court, and therefore improperly before the High Court.
AG Seeks Adjournment
In court on Tuesday, July 15, State Attorney Reginald Nii Odoi informed the bench that both the Attorney General and his deputy—who are personally handling the case—were currently out of the jurisdiction on official state duties. He requested an adjournment.
“I have the express instructions of the Honourable Attorney General to seek an adjournment of this matter to next week,” Mr. Odoi submitted.
“The AG and his deputy are engaged in equally important national duties abroad.”
He added that the request had been discussed with opposing counsel, who did not object, and proposed Wednesday, July 23, 2025, as the new hearing date, subject to the court’s calendar.
Counsel for CJ Agrees but Urges Speed
Appearing for Justice Torkornoo, Kwabena Adu Kusi, with Benedicta Asamoah Antwi, confirmed the agreement but called for a speedy trial given the matter’s public significance.
“By the nature of the proceedings and the public interest attached, we require some speed,” Kusi said.
“We are before the first respondents on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays. That leaves Wednesdays and Fridays available for this matter.”
He further appealed to the court to prioritise the hearing on Wednesday, July 23, to facilitate timely resolution.
Justice Amoako granted the adjournment and reaffirmed that the affidavit in opposition must be duly served with proof before the next hearing.
The court set Wednesday, July 23, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. for hearing the motion to strike out the suspended Chief Justice’s suit.
There was no order as to cost, and Justice Torkornoo was not present in court.
Background of the Case
The ongoing legal dispute involving suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo stems from a judicial review application she filed at the Human Rights Division of the High Court in Accra.
In her application, the Chief Justice challenged the legality and propriety of the five-member committee established under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution to investigate allegations made against her.
She also alleged violations of her fundamental human rights.
Justice Torkornoo named multiple parties in her suit, including the Article 146 Committee (1st Defendant), its Chairman Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang (2nd Defendant), Supreme Court Justice Samuel Kwame Adonu-Asiedu (3rd Defendant), former Auditor-General Daniel Yao Domelevo (4th Defendant), Major Flora Bazaawaabnuba Dalugo (5th Defendant), Prof. James Sefah Dzizah (6th Defendant), and the Attorney General (7th Defendant).
On July 1, 2025, the Attorney General filed an application at the same court seeking to strike out the Chief Justice’s judicial review motion.
The AG argued that the application was flawed due to a grave misstatement of the applicant’s legal capacity and failure to include necessary and mandatory parties. According to the AG, these procedural defects rendered the originating process invalid.
In an affidavit supporting the application to strike out the case, State Attorney Reginald Nii Odoi, on behalf of the AG’s Office, reiterated that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
He contended that either the issues raised had already been adjudicated by the Supreme Court or were still pending before it.
The affidavit cited several related constitutional cases, including:
Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo v The Attorney-General & 5 Others (Suit No. J8/113/2025)
CenCes v The Attorney-General & 2 Others (Suit No. J1/20/2025)
Vincent Ekow Assafuah v The Attorney-General (Suit No. J1/18/2025)
Ebenezer Osei-Owusu v The Attorney-General (Suit No. J1/19/2025)
Theodore Kofi Atta-Quartey v The Attorney-General (Suit No. J8/109/2025)
The AG maintains that the High Court is barred from determining issues that are either pending before or have already been resolved by the Supreme Court.
Consequently, the office is seeking a court order to strike out the Chief Justice’s application in its entirety.
