Acting Chief Justice Justice Baffoe-Bonnie
Private legal practitioner Kofi Bekai has asserted that, regardless of the format or stage of submission, the petition seeking the removal of Acting Chief Justice Justice Baffoe-Bonnie must go through the necessary constitutional processes as required of the President.
He contended that even if the petition were disregarded before Justice Baffoe-Bonnie is officially vetted, approved and sworn in, the outstanding petition seeking his removal would still need to be addressed.
Bekai argued that describing the petition as “premature” misses the central point, which is whether the allegations have merit, warrant a formal probe, and are serious enough to halt the appointment.
Speaking in an interview on Nyankonton Mu Nsem on Rainbow Radio 87.5FM, he reiterated that proceeding with the confirmation while ignoring the petition would only delay the inevitable need to address the allegations.
A Ghanaian citizen, Ghande Nalin Yussif, submitted the petition on October 6, 2025, seeking the removal of the Acting Chief Justice from office.
The document formally invokes Article 146(1) of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, which outlines the grounds and procedures for removing Superior Court judges.
Under this constitutional provision, a Justice of the Superior Court can only be removed for stated misbehaviour, incompetence or physical or mental incapacity to perform official duties.
The petitioner’s allegations focus on what he describes as improper conduct by Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, which allegedly constitutes a violation of Ghana’s Judicial Code of Conduct for Judges and Magistrates.
Yussif further claims that the behaviour contradicts the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, an internationally recognised framework for judicial ethics.
Specifically, the petition alleges that the Acting Chief Justice made inappropriate statements to a plaintiff involved in a pending constitutional case.
Reacting to the development, Kofi Bekai stated that the Acting Chief Justice’s current status — whether acting or confirmed is immaterial to the President’s constitutional obligations.
“You can wait for him to be confirmed first before triggering your actions, or you can stop him from being confirmed as Chief Justice. However, no matter the shape or form of the petition, once the President receives such a petition, he is bound by law to send it to the Council of State for consideration and advice,” Bekai stressed.
He added that the priority should not be to determine whether the petition is premature but to assess whether the issues raised are significant enough to warrant resolution before the appointment is approved.
“If you ignore it and confirm him, the petition will still come. If you want to prevent that, you should first deal with the petition, stay your hand, and wait until the processes are concluded before approving him to officially assume office,” he advised.
