Removal proceedings are a ‘mockery of justice’ – Justice Torkornoo
Suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo has strongly denounced the ongoing proceedings by the Justice Pwamang Committee, which are intended to investigate the petitions for her removal.
She labelled the activity of the committee as a “mockery of justice” and a deceptive ploy to unjustly remove her from her position.
In a supplemental affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court as part of her legal battle, Justice Torkornoo claims that her dignity and fundamental rights have been violated.
She describes the treatment she has faced as cruel and demeaning, arguing that the process undermines her constitutional rights.
Additionally, she has voiced criticism regarding the hearing venue, which is situated in a high-security area, a stark contrast to previous enquiries that took place at the Judicial Service’s Court Complex.
She considers the current location to be both inappropriate and intimidating.
READ ALSO: Supreme Court dismisses case challenging Chief Justice’s removal
Justice Torkornoo has expressed concerns over the committee’s lack of transparency, particularly its failure to present a legal basis or criteria for establishing a prima facie case against her.
This move, she argues, compromises her ability to understand her rights and prepare an effective defence.
Despite informing the committee about her challenge to their proceedings in the Supreme Court, she contends that hearing dates were scheduled without her knowledge or the participation of her legal counsel, who was unavailable on the set date.
Her affidavit further contests the committee’s decision to permit petitioners to present evidence through witnesses instead of being present themselves.
Moreover, Justice Torkornoo asserts that she has experienced significant mental distress due to the committee’s actions, which include restrictions on her mobile phone access, intrusive body searches, and the exclusion of her husband and children from the hearing room.
In contrast, she alleges that the petitioners’ counsel and clients were granted access to their mobile phones and received preferential treatment.
Justice Torkornoo argues that these factors, along with the choice of Osu Castle as the hearing venue, represent a deliberate effort to exert psychological pressure on her.