Justice on Trial: Ghana Bar Challenges Presidential Suspension of Chief Justice

In what is shaping up to be a constitutional standoff, the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) has boldly condemned President John Dramani Mahama’s recent suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo—describing the move as unconstitutional, procedurally defective, and a dangerous precedent for judicial independence in Ghana.

The suspension, announced on April 22, 2025, follows three petitions filed against the Chief Justice and is said to be in line with Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution. A committee of inquiry has since been constituted, and Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie has been appointed as Acting Chief Justice.

But the Ghana Bar Association isn’t having it.

“A Constitutional Error” – GBA Fires Back

At its Mid-Year Conference, the GBA passed a strong resolution calling for the immediate revocation of the Chief Justice’s suspension. According to the Bar, the President’s decision lacked the legal framework required under Article 296, which mandates that all discretionary powers must be exercised based on published and transparent regulations.

“There are no published regulations governing the process under Article 146. Therefore, the President’s actions were procedurally improper and unconstitutional,” the GBA stated.

The Association further called for the withdrawal of all directives issued by the Acting Chief Justice relating to case assignments, insisting these powers remain with the substantive Chief Justice until a formal removal process is concluded.

Legal Fireworks: Constitutional Experts Weigh In

Not everyone agrees with the Bar.

Renowned constitutional lawyer Thaddeus Sory criticized the GBA’s interpretation, stating that the President acted within his powers under Article 146(10), which allows for suspension of a Chief Justice upon advice from the Council of State.

“The law is not in the bosom of the Bar,” Sory said pointedly. “The GBA cannot reinterpret a constitutional process to suit its emotional or institutional preferences.”

Similarly, the Progressive People’s Party (PPP) described the GBA’s resolution as “an attempt to arm-twist the presidency and overstep its role as a professional body.”

But many others, including retired judges and civil society leaders, have warned that if the executive is allowed to suspend a Chief Justice without clear and enforceable regulations, the doors could be opened to dangerous political interference in the judiciary.

Justice in the Crossfire: What’s at Stake

This legal and political confrontation is more than just a technical dispute—it touches the very soul of Ghana’s democratic integrity.

“This is not about personalities. It is about preserving the sanctity of the Judiciary,” said Justice (rtd.) Stephen Brobbey, former Supreme Court Judge. “The independence of the judiciary must never be subject to executive whims.”

The GBA is reportedly considering a legal challenge if the President does not revoke the suspension and clarify the processes involved.

Meanwhile, the investigative committee is quietly proceeding, with legal observers keeping a close eye on how this matter unfolds in what could become a landmark constitutional test.

Editor’s Note:

At a time when public confidence in democratic institutions across Africa is fragile, the Ghanaian situation presents a powerful reminder: When justice is on trial, every citizen is on the witness stand.