A petition seeking the removal of Supreme Court Justice Yonny Kulendi has been dismissed after the Chief Justice determined that the complaint failed to establish a prima facie case for further action.
Government Spokesperson Felix Kwakye Ofosu disclosed in a statement issued on Tuesday, December 16, 2025, that the matter has now reached a close, with the petitioner being officially informed of the outcome.
The petitioner submitted a petition seeking the removal of Justice Kulendi. In line with the requirements of Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, the President’s first step was to refer the petition to the Chief Justice.
The Chief Justice conducted a preliminary assessment to determine whether the petition disclosed a prima facie case.
Without a determination of a prima facie case, meaning sufficient evidence or basis on the face of it, the process for removal—which involves the formation of a full committee—cannot proceed.
After reviewing the contents of the petition, the Chief Justice communicated her findings back to the President. The Chief Justice informed the President that, upon review, the petition did not disclose a prima facie case against Justice Kulendi.
Meanwhile, a letter signed by Dr Callistus Mahama, Secretary to the President, and addressed to the petitioner, Daniel Marfo Ofori-Atta had also explained reasons why the petition failed.
“I have the instructions of His Excellency the President to respond to your petition dated 30 September 2025 on the above matter,” the letter stated.
Dr Mahama indicated that, in accordance with Article 146(3) of the 1992 Constitution, the President referred the petition to the Chief Justice on 20 October 2025 to determine whether it disclosed a prima facie case.
“By a letter dated 2 December 2025, the Chief Justice informed His Excellency the President that no prima facie case had been established by the petition to warrant any further investigation,” the letter said.
Quoting the Chief Justice’s determination, the letter said: “In the circumstances, the Petitioner’s own evidential material undermines and collapses the factual foundation of the allegations.
“When compared against the sworn testimony of Mr Jakpa, the petition’s claim that Justice Kulendi abused his office to secure bail for his cousin and that he sought to inappropriately influence the outcome of the case is exposed as a clear distortion of the record and fails to disclose any evidentiary basis upon which a prima facie finding can be properly grounded.
“In conclusion, it is my determination that this petition fails to meet the evidential threshold required to establish a prima facie case under Article 146(3) of the Constitution. Accordingly, I find that no prima facie case has been established against Justice Yonny Kulendi by the Petitioner.”
“In view of the Chief Justice’s determination that the constitutional threshold under Article 146(3) has not been met, no further steps are required in respect of your petition. The matter is therefore concluded.”
