By Daniel Bampoe
A fierce storm is gathering across Ghana’s civic, political, and legal landscape following the suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo by President John Dramani Mahama.
What began as a quiet legal process has quickly morphed into a national controversy, with organized labour groups, major opposition political parties, legal luminaries, and civil society leaders warning that the move threatens the constitutional integrity and democratic foundations of the Republic.
Labour Unions
On Thursday, May 1, during the 2025 May Day celebration held at Independence Square, organized labour broke its silence.
Standing just meters away from President Mahama, Trades Union Congress (TUC) Secretary General Joshua Ansah issued a measured but serious rebuke of the President’s handling of the matter.
“Mr. President, organized labour is deeply concerned about the decision to suspend the Chief Justice,” he said.
“These actions set the country and its democracy on a slippery slope. We advise you to hasten slowly and proceed cautiously on this matter. Your decision will be consequential for our democracy.”
The statement was notable not only for its substance but also for its timing. Labour leaders have largely maintained a cautious distance from partisan affairs.
Their decision to wade into the controversy signals the deepening national anxiety over perceived executive overreach.
Constitutional Provisions and Executive Discretion
President Mahama’s action followed the establishment of a prima facie case by a committee formed under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, which allows for the removal of a Chief Justice upon the receipt of a petition, the establishment of a prima facie case by the Chief Justice or President (depending on who is involved), and the formation of a five-member committee to investigate.
However, critics argue that the President’s suspension of the Chief Justice bypassed key procedural safeguards and amounted to a misuse of constitutional authority.
According to Article 146, while the President has a role in transmitting petitions, he is not authorized to unilaterally suspend a Chief Justice without the conclusion of a full investigation and a recommendation for removal.
Legal and political analysts say the President’s action assumes powers he does not constitutionally possess.
NPP Condemns
The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has been among the most vocal in condemning the President’s action.
At a press conference at its headquarters on May 1, the party’s National Organizer, Henry Nana Boakye, popularly known as Nana B, lambasted the decision.
“This is not only unconstitutional—it is reckless and dangerous,” he said. “The President is neither judge nor prosecutor in this process. His action is ultra vires and must be reversed immediately.”
Nana B also raised alarm over the composition of the investigative committee, particularly the choice of Justice Gabriel Pwamangt as its chair.
Justice Pwamang, he noted, had previously authored a ruling directly related to the petitions against the Chief Justice, raising questions of conflict of interest.
“His refusal to recuse himself, despite prior involvement in a related case, shows clear bias and undermines public confidence in the process,” Nana B stated.
The NPP believes that the current developments are part of a broader strategy by the Mahama administration to weaken judicial independence, particularly ahead of the 2025 general elections.
