Chief Justice Torkonoo Files Judicial Review to Stop Impeachment Proceedings
She cites procedural flaws and constitutional breaches in her application to the High Court
- CJ Gertrude Torkonoo has filed for judicial review at the High Court to stop her impeachment proceedings
- She alleges serious procedural violations
- Torkonoo warns the process undermines constitutional protections and sets a dangerous precedent
Suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo has taken legal action in a bid to halt her impeachment proceedings, filing for a judicial review at the High Court. She contends the process—spearheaded by the Justice Pwamang Committee—is riddled with procedural irregularities and constitutional breaches.
At a press conference, Justice Torkonoo outlined several alleged violations, arguing they have compromised the fairness and legitimacy of the inquiry:
-
Blocked Legal Counsel: Her lawyer was reportedly sidelined on the first day of hearings due to her own absence, with key dates and proceedings scheduled without legal representation—an alleged breach of her right to a fair hearing.
-
Unclear Charges: Torkonoo says the committee has failed to disclose which allegations a prima facie case was established for, leaving her unable to mount an informed defence.
-
No Cross-Examination Rights: Two petitioners were reportedly excused from testifying, denying her the chance to challenge their claims in person.
-
Family Exclusion: The Chief Justice claims she wasn’t allowed to have her husband or a close family member present during proceedings.
-
Intrusive Searches: She alleges that she was subjected to invasive body and personal searches—treatment she argues is inappropriate for someone in her constitutional role.
Torkonoo also objected to the hearing’s venue—a high-security site at Castle Drive, Osu—suggesting the location was deliberately chosen to stifle public visibility and induce fear. She disclosed that the venue, Adu Lodge, was historically linked to the 1981 murder plot of judges, including her uncle, Major Sam Acquah.
Highlighting broader implications, she warned the case could erode constitutional protections for key independent officeholders like the Auditor-General, Electoral Commissioner, and CHRAJ.
Torkonoo strongly rejected calls for her resignation, stating:
“To step down would be to legitimize a deeply flawed process. I owe it to the Constitution and the judiciary to fight this through.”
She concluded by denouncing the proceedings as legally unfounded and lacking transparency, asserting that they dangerously deviate from the constitutionally mandated inquiry model under Article 146.
