Ansa-Asare questions legal basis of Torkornoo’s removal from Supreme Court

The founder of MountCrest University College and former Director of the Ghana School of Law, Mr. Kwaku Ansa-Asare, has criticized the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo from her position as a Justice of the Supreme Court, describing it as lacking any sound legal foundation.

Speaking at MountCrest’s 8th Congregation Ceremony on Saturday, September 21, 2025, where 137 students graduated, Mr. Ansa-Asare warned that the government risks setting a troubling precedent for Ghana’s judiciary if the action is allowed to stand.

According to him, Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution permits the removal of a Chief Justice for stated misbehaviour or incompetence, but the same process does not automatically terminate their appointment as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

“The Constitution provides for the removal of the Chief Justice. It does not say that once removed as Chief Justice, you lose your seat as a Justice of the Supreme Court,” he argued.

Mr. Ansa-Asare drew attention to Articles 11(1)(e) and 11(2), which incorporate the principles of equity into Ghana’s legal framework, insisting that fairness must guide the interpretation of constitutional provisions.

Rather than expulsion, Mr. Ansa-Asare urged the state to treat Justice Torkornoo with dignity by formally retiring her and granting all her due entitlements.

“My advice is that the former Chief Justice be formally retired as a Justice of the Supreme Court so that she can take a hard-earned entitlement,” he told the gathering.

He cautioned that removing her outright could be perceived as a politically motivated attack on judicial independence, undermining public trust in the judiciary.

Justice Torkornoo, appointed as Chief Justice on June 12, 2023, was removed on September 1, 2025, following the outcome of a five-member committee constituted under Article 146(6).

The committee found her guilty of “misbehaviour,” citing allegations of misuse of public funds, including the use of Judicial Service resources to cover travel expenses for her husband and daughter during private trips.

Bound by Article 146(9), President John Dramani Mahama accepted the committee’s recommendation and issued her removal.

Critics like Mr. Ansa-Asare, however, argue that the scope of the petition—and by extension the committee’s mandate—was limited to her role as Chief Justice, not her substantive seat on the Supreme Court.

This has ignited a wider debate about judicial independence, the interpretation of constitutional limits, and the proper standards of accountability for high-ranking judicial officers.