Legal professionals and political figures have called for measured dialogue amid growing public debate over a petition seeking the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, underscoring the need to safeguard Ghana’s democratic institutions.
Human rights advocate Gloria Ofori-Boadu, speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile, cautioned against actions that could destabilize the nation’s constitutional order. “We are jumping the gun,” she said, emphasizing Ghana’s evolution into a “constitutional liberal democracy” anchored in rule of law and human rights. “Our freedoms are enshrined in the Constitution. We must preserve them through restraint and due process, not haste or conjecture.”
Her remarks followed a petition by private citizen Martin Kpebu, which alleges judicial misconduct and calls for Torkornoo’s dismissal under constitutional provisions. While the petition’s validity remains under scrutiny, Ofori-Boadu stressed that Ghana’s democratic maturity demands adherence to legal frameworks, warning against politicizing judicial accountability.
New Patriotic Party (NPP) Director of Legal Affairs Frank Davies echoed concerns over public discourse, clarifying that the constitutional process for judicial removal is not inherently problematic. “The issue isn’t the removal mechanism itself, which is constitutionally sound,” he stated. “The aberration lies in how influential voices are muddying the conversation, potentially swaying public opinion without factual rigor.”
Davies, while affirming citizens’ right to petition, criticized the “persistent refrain by people who should know better” for distorting the narrative. His comments reflect broader unease over polarized rhetoric overshadowing procedural clarity.
The debate unfolds against a backdrop of heightened political tensions, with Ghana’ judiciary increasingly under public scrutiny. Critics argue that while judicial accountability is vital, sensationalized discussions risk eroding trust in institutions.
Ghana’s 1992 Constitution (Article 146) outlines a multi-tiered process for removing senior judges, requiring parliamentary oversight and presidential approval after a prima facie case is established. Legal analysts note that such mechanisms, rarely invoked, are designed to balance accountability with judicial independence.
Ofori-Boadu and Davies’ interventions highlight a delicate balance: upholding democratic checks while preventing procedural debates from devolving into partisan conflicts. As Ghana approaches election cycles, maintaining institutional integrity remains pivotal to public confidence.
The Chief Justice’s office has yet to formally address the petition, leaving room for legal experts to urge transparency and adherence to due process. For now, the discourse serves as a litmus test for Ghana’s democratic resilience, emphasizing that robust institutions thrive not on impulsive actions but on principled, inclusive dialogue.
