The Supreme Court has dealt another blow to the embattled Chief Justice, Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, dismissing her latest attempt to block an investigative committee from proceeding with its mandate to examine petitions seeking her removal from office.
On Wednesday, May 28, a five-member panel of the apex court unanimously rejected an interlocutory injunction filed by Justice Torkornoo. The ruling clears the way for the committee, constituted by President John Mahama, to continue its inquiry into allegations raised in three separate petitions against the suspended Chief Justice.
The court’s decision came just hours after another legal setback for Justice Torkornoo, as the same panel also struck out a supplementary affidavit she had filed in support of her injunction application.
Justice Torkornoo, who was suspended in accordance with Article 146(10) of the 1992 Constitution, had filed the application on May 21, seeking to freeze all proceedings of the committee until the Supreme Court rules on the substantive case she brought challenging the legality of the ongoing inquiry.
In her affidavit, the suspended Chief Justice asked the court to issue an order prohibiting the committee from convening or continuing any hearings.
She also requested that Justices Gabriel Scott Pwamang and Samuel Kwame Adibu-Asiedu—both sitting Supreme Court judges and members of the investigative panel—be barred from taking part in the deliberations.
The investigative body, formed under the constitutional process for the removal of superior court judges, includes Justices Pwamang and Adibu-Asiedu, as well as prominent figures from various professional backgrounds: former Auditor-General Daniel Yao Domelevo, retired military officer Major Flora Bazuwaaruah Dalugo, and Professor James Sefah Dziasah, an academic.
Justice Torkornoo’s legal team also asked the Court to suspend the presidential warrant that authorized her suspension, arguing that her fundamental rights and the principles of natural justice were at risk if the committee proceeded while the case was still pending before the Supreme Court.
However, the panel of justices rejected all of her submissions, affirming the constitutional authority under which the committee was established and asserting that the ongoing proceedings do not breach her legal or procedural rights at this stage.
This is not the first time attempts have been made to challenge the legitimacy of the committee. Several other suits filed at the Supreme Court by individuals and civil society actors seeking to block or discredit the process have also been dismissed.
With the injunction bid now struck out, the committee is expected to continue its hearings in the coming days, as pressure mounts on both sides of the legal and political divide over the unprecedented move to remove a sitting Chief Justice.
