In another legal setback for Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, the Human Rights Division of the Accra High Court on July 31, 2025, dismissed her application for judicial review, labeling it an “abuse of court processes” and stating that the court lacked jurisdiction. This ruling is a significant moment in the unfolding legal drama surrounding petitions seeking her removal from office.
The concept of abuse of court processes, as cited by the High Court, typically refers to the improper use of judicial proceedings to achieve objectives such as delay, harassment, or manipulation of justice. In this context, the court’s rejection implies that Justice Torkornoo’s application was seen as a tactical maneuver rather than a genuine attempt to seek constitutional redress.
Also Read: Why Pep Guardiola could decide to cash in on Man City midfield ace Rodri this summer
This decision further limits the legal options available to the Chief Justice as she attempts to stop the removal proceedings initiated against her.
Although the full judgment outlining the High Court’s legal rationale is yet to be published, the invocation of “abuse of court processes” suggests the court viewed the application as a frivolous or obstructive use of legal machinery, potentially aimed at derailing the constitutionally mandated inquiry.
Background to the Petitions and Suspension
Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, who took office on June 12, 2023, as Ghana’s 15th Chief Justice and the third woman to hold the position, has been embroiled in a high-stakes legal and political standoff since petitions for her removal surfaced.
Under Article 146 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, a petition for the removal of a Chief Justice or a Justice of the Supreme Court must be submitted to the President. The President, in consultation with the Council of State, is then required to appoint a committee to investigate the matter.
Today’s dismissal by the High Court follows an earlier legal blow: in May 2025, the Supreme Court of Ghana unanimously dismissed an injunction application filed by Justice Torkornoo, which aimed to halt the ongoing inquiry into the petitions. The ruling allowed the five-member special committee, established to probe the allegations, to continue its work uninterrupted.
The consistent rejection of her legal attempts—first by the Supreme Court and now the High Court—underscores the judiciary’s apparent unwillingness to entertain procedural delays to the constitutionally established removal process.
Chief Justice Torkornoo has repeatedly declared her innocence, describing the process as “flawed,” “politically driven,” and “unconstitutional.” In a fiery press conference on June 25, 2025, she vowed not to resign, stating that doing so would “legitimise an unconstitutional and cruel process.”
She further alleged receiving “veiled threats” to resign voluntarily—suggesting efforts to coerce her into stepping down in lieu of a formal investigation.
source: myjoyonline
