The Chief Justice, Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, has responded to the allegations levelled against her in a petition submitted to the President seeking her removal from office.
She strongly denies the claims, which include misconduct and incompetence, and describes them as unfounded and unsupported by evidence.
In her response in a 23-page document addressed to President John Mahama at Jubilee House, the Chief Justice dismissed all 25 allegations, including 21 claims of misconduct and four on grounds of incompetence.
She argued that the petitioner failed to present the necessary evidence to establish a prima facie case, as required under Article 146(1) of the 1992 Constitution.
“Nevertheless, in order to assure His Excellency the President, and the Councilof State that as Chief Justice, I have not conducted myself wrongly as isbeing alleged, I wish to humbly assist with the resolution of the complaintsof the Petitioner by presenting, to the extent available to me, records on thevarious subject matters.
“Despite the number of complaints submitted in this petition, no evidence of the subject matters raised have been presented to even raise a presumption of wrongdoing,” Justice Torkornoo stated.
Travel Allegations and Financial Accountability
On the alleged misuse of public funds for travel, the embattled Chief Justice clarified that she neither authorises nor administers her own per diems and travel arrangements.
She explained that these are determined by the Article 71 Committee and processed by the Judicial Secretary and Director of Finance.
“I am not a signatory to any account and do not have access to the accounts of the Judicial Service.”
Court Records Tampering Accusation Denied
Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, commenting on the claims of interfering in judicial proceedings—particularly the case involving James Gyakye Quayson—labeled them as “baseless.”
“As head of the Judiciary, I had no duty to interact with the lawyer of the accused person. All other processes were handled by the relevant officers,” she stated.
Decisions Grounded in Law
Addressing the four allegations of incompetence, she said the decisions cited by the petitioner were based on constitutional and statutory mandates, not on arbitrariness as claimed.
“Each of the decisions complained about has been sufficiently shown to be grounded in the Constitution, in policy, statutory and regulatory considerations, and established practice,” she stated.
Previously Resolved Matters and ‘Double Jeopardy’
Justice Torkornoo also accused the petitioner of reviving previously dismissed claims, including those raised in a similar petition by Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare in 2024.
