Mahama’s removal of CJ premature – Barker-Vormawor

Legal expert Oliver Barker-Vormawor has raised concerns over President John Mahama’s decision to remove Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo before all pending petitions were fully heard.

President Mahama acted on Monday, September 1, to remove the Chief Justice with immediate effect, citing misbehavior, following recommendations from a constitutional committee set up under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.

Barker-Vormawor criticised the committee’s decision to split the petitions into separate parts, saying it caused unnecessary legal complications and delayed the process.

“The trifurcation created confusion because documents relevant to one petition were needed for another. We had to debate whether to resubmit evidence, which slowed everything down,” he explained.

He argued the committee’s overly technical approach raised doubts about what evidence should be accepted, complicating the case further.

He also expressed surprise that the President acted before the committee had finished considering all petitions.

“I expected the President to wait for the full report on all petitions before making any decision. Taking action now raises legal questions, especially since the petition was filed against a sitting Chief Justice, but she is no longer in office,” Barker-Vormawor noted.

Citing a Supreme Court precedent, he questioned whether proceedings against a retired Chief Justice could continue.

“The Supreme Court ruled in Duabo that once someone retires, legal proceedings against them cannot continue. Since she’s no longer Chief Justice, it’s unclear if the petitions are still valid,” he said.

Barker-Vormawor believes the Presidency should have taken a more careful and comprehensive approach.

“If the committee was still hearing petitions, the President should have waited to get the full picture before acting,” he advised.

Drawing on Ghana’s electoral history, he suggested lessons can be learned for handling such matters in the future.

“In 1992, when presidential and parliamentary elections were separated, it created problems, so now we hold them on the same day. Similarly, addressing all petitions together would have been cleaner and more efficient,” he stressed.