The Supreme Court has, in a unanimous decision, struck out the supplementary affidavit filed by the suspended Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo, ruling that it disclosed information meant to be kept confidential under Article 146 of the Constitution.
The five-member panel delivered its ruling on Wednesday, May 28, upholding an application by the Deputy Attorney General, Justice Srem Sai, who argued that the affidavit breached the confidentiality of the committee’s impeachment proceedings.
Background
On May 26, Justice Torkornoo filed a supplementary affidavit in support of her application for an interlocutory injunction to halt the impeachment inquiry against her. In the affidavit, she described her treatment as “a mockery of justice, an assault on judicial independence, and worse than the treatment meted out to persons accused of treason.”
She stated, “The process I am being subjected to is a complete desecration of my basic constitutional rights to a fair trial, a violation of my dignity, and subjection to inhuman and degrading treatment.”
According to the affidavit, Justice Torkornoo had notified the committee of the lawsuit she filed at the Supreme Court on May 21 and submitted copies of the relevant processes. However, the committee proceeded with its inquiry the following day.
“Notwithstanding receipt of the processes filed… the members of the committee indicated their resolve to proceed,” she stated. “I do not know the specific allegations I am to answer to. I cannot even begin to prepare a defence.”
She also described several troubling incidents, including the committee’s refusal to recognise her counsel, even though he had received hearing notices. She said, “The committee shockingly refused to recognise my counsel… and proceeded to fix subsequent hearing dates without involving him.”
Justice Torkornoo further criticised the committee for allowing third-party witnesses to testify in place of the petitioners, denying her and her legal team access to electronic devices, and holding the hearings at the Osu Castle—a high-security facility she described as intentionally intimidating.
“All Article 146 proceedings, with the exception of the one I am being subjected to, have been held in a judicial facility,” she noted. “The location of proceedings affecting me in a cordoned high-security facility boggles the mind.”
She described these events as part of a broader attack on the judiciary. “The persistent violations of my constitutional rights show that the whole proceedings… are a mockery of justice and a ruse to unjustifiably remove me from office.”
Justice Torkornoo urged the Supreme Court to intervene, stressing that the case goes beyond her personal ordeal and concerns the protection of judicial independence and the constitutional rights of all superior court judges.
Source: MyJoyOnline.com
ALSO READ:
