AG moves to dismiss suspended CJ’s new affidavit
The Attorney-General’s office has filed an urgent motion to strike out a supplementary affidavit submitted by suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, just hours before a critical Supreme Court hearing that could shape the outcome of her ongoing impeachment proceedings.
In court documents filed on May 27, 2025, Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai argued that the affidavit containing serious claims of “mental torture” and constitutional breaches violates Article 146(8) of the Constitution and must be removed from the court’s records.
The affidavit, submitted by Justice Torkornoo, outlines troubling allegations about her treatment during the impeachment process, including invasive security checks, restricted access to legal counsel, and a lack of transparency regarding the charges against her.
She also challenges the choice of Osu Castle, a high-security government facility, as the hearing venue, describing it as a deliberate act of intimidation, given that such proceedings are ordinarily held in judicial premises.
The Supreme Court is set to hear the matter today in a session that could prove decisive for both the suspended Chief Justice and the integrity of Ghana’s judicial processes.
Background
On May 26, suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo filed a blistering affidavit at the Supreme Court, describing her impeachment ordeal as a brutal assault on judicial independence and personal dignity.
She likened her treatment to being worse than that of treason suspects, citing invasive searches, denial of legal counsel, and a lack of due process.
“I don’t even know the charges I’m facing,” she stated.
Justice Torkornoo also slammed the committee for proceeding with the inquiry despite being served with court documents, refusing to recognise her lawyer, and allowing third-party witnesses in place of petitioners.
She described the use of Osu Castle as the hearing venue as deliberate intimidation, adding that the entire process threatens not just her position, but the independence and security of all superior court judges.
She is urging the Supreme Court to intervene, warning: “This is not justice. It’s a dangerous precedent.”