The Human Right Court has adjourned to Thursday, July 31, 2025, for a ruling on a motion by the Attorney General (AG) seeking to strike out an originating motion for judicial review filed against Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo and others.
At the heart of the matter is a procedural clash over requests for further details in the AG’s motion, with Deputy Attorney General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai arguing that the opposing side’s demands amount to a request for legal advice—something the AG’s office is not obliged to provide.
The court, however, clarified that the letter from lawyers for the Chief Justice, led by Kwabena Adu-Kusi and Solomon Aubin, was a legitimate request under Order 11 Rule 12 of the Supreme Court Rules, which allows a party to seek further particulars to clarify issues raised in an affidavit or pleading.
Chief Justice Torkornoo, sitting as a single judge, rejected the AG’s claim that the request overreached legal boundaries.
She explained that the request was focused on clarifying factual assertions, particularly concerning references to prior Supreme Court decisions and the alleged failure to include necessary parties.
In response, the Deputy AG cited the case of Ahinakwa II v Okaija III [2011] SCGLR 205, arguing that granting the request could unfairly aid the opposing party.
The Chief Justice disagreed, stressing that the facts in that case differed and that no amendment was being sought in the present matter.
The motion to strike out the judicial review application is based on two grounds: that necessary parties were not joined, and that the issues raised had either already been determined by the court or are currently pending.
The AG’s office is relying on exhibits from five related Supreme Court cases, including Justice Gertrude Torkornoo v AG, CCCER & LPG v AG, and others, to support its position.
The court has directed both parties to file written legal submissions—by July 28 for the AG and July 29 for the Chief Justice’s team. The submissions must address legal questions relating to jurisdiction, joinder of parties, admissibility of exhibits (including those from Article 146 Committee proceedings), and whether the application raises issues previously determined or pending.
Soft copies of the submissions are also to be filed in the same format as the hard copies, by midnight on the respective dates.
Hearing on the AG’s motion resumes on July 31 at 9:00 a.m.
