The Supreme Court will start hearing a big case next Wednesday that fights against trying to fire Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo. Vincent Ekow Assafuah, who represents Old Tafo as a Member of Parliament, brought this case forward. He says President Mahama broke the rules after he got three different requests asking to remove the Chief Justice from her job.
Assafuah claims the main problem happened because nobody let Chief Justice Torkornoo answer any accusations before the President talked to the Council of State about firing her. His lawyer, former Attorney-General Godfred Dame, believes this step skipped over rules written in Article 146(6) of the Constitution, which tells everyone exactly how to remove a Chief Justice properly.
The lawsuit states that leaving Chief Justice Torkornoo out of early discussions hurts her right to defend herself fairly. They worry this attack threatens judges' ability to work without outside pressure or control. Legal experts pay close attention because whatever happens might create new rules about how high-ranking officials can lose their positions.
This case matters because it asks important questions about following proper steps when trying to remove someone from such an important job. The decision could help explain exactly what the Constitution requires whenever similar situations happen later. Many people will watch closely when the hearing begins on April 9, 2025.
Assafuah claims the main problem happened because nobody let Chief Justice Torkornoo answer any accusations before the President talked to the Council of State about firing her. His lawyer, former Attorney-General Godfred Dame, believes this step skipped over rules written in Article 146(6) of the Constitution, which tells everyone exactly how to remove a Chief Justice properly.
The lawsuit states that leaving Chief Justice Torkornoo out of early discussions hurts her right to defend herself fairly. They worry this attack threatens judges' ability to work without outside pressure or control. Legal experts pay close attention because whatever happens might create new rules about how high-ranking officials can lose their positions.
This case matters because it asks important questions about following proper steps when trying to remove someone from such an important job. The decision could help explain exactly what the Constitution requires whenever similar situations happen later. Many people will watch closely when the hearing begins on April 9, 2025.
