The President of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), Efua Ghartey, has reacted to the removal of Justice Gertrude Torkornoo as the Chief Justice of Ghana.
According to a report by thelawplatform.com, Efua Ghartey, in her address at the 2025 Ghana Bar Association Conference in Wa, on Monday, September 12, 2025, criticised the removal of Justice Torkornoo from office.
AG warns of external pressure on Ghana’s judiciary amid Torkornoo saga
She noted that though the process followed in the removal of Justice Torkornoo was lawful per the requirements of Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana; the process was unfair as it lacked procedural clarity.
“The President of the Bar said the process for the removal was unfair, particularly (sic) when deployed in the removal of a Chief Justice. The President of the Bar made it quite clear that the position of the Bar as announced at the mini conference in Accra was not against the legality of the removal process but rather, the lack of procedural clarity in the removal process,” part of the report reads.
The association’s stance has sparked another wave of strong criticism from prominent legal practitioners.
They highlighted what they see as the association’s hypocrisy, particularly regarding the processes outlined in Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.
Here are some of the legal personalities who have criticised the association;
Stephen Kwaku Asare
The private legal practitioner criticised the association, calling on them to desist from making sermons from Article 146 used in the removal of the former CJ.
Kwaku Azar referred to the GBA’s 1995 attempt to remove a former Chief Justice under Article 2, instead of following the constitutional procedure outlined in Article 146.
He further criticised the association for their apparent effort to promote the narrative that Article 146 ‘undermines judicial independence’.
In a Facebook post on September 15, 2025, titled ‘GBA Must Stop Sermonizing on Article 146’, he wrote, “In 1995, the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) itself tried to remove Chief Justice IK Abban. Instead of invoking Article 146, which is the sole constitutional procedure for removing a Chief Justice, the GBA filed under Article 2, arguing that Justice Abban lacked the “high moral character and proven integrity” required by Article 128(4).
“The Supreme Court immediately saw through that maneuver. It held that the GBA’s action was nothing more than an attempted removal through the backdoor. The court threw the case out, pointing to Article 146 as the exclusive process for removal. That is why today’s GBA cannot credibly sermonise that using Article 146 is an ‘attack on the judiciary.’ Where were these threats in 1995, when they themselves bypassed Article 146 and tried to throw out a Chief Justice? The truth is the opposite: Article 146 is the constitutional safeguard. What was dangerous was the GBA’s own effort in 1995 to dodge it.”
“The lesson is clear: the GBA should stop preaching about Article 146 as if it undermines judicial independence. It once tried to dodge that very article, and the court reminded us all that Article 146 is the proper safeguard, not an assault. A Chief Justice who has done no wrong cannot be removed; and one who has, can only be removed through the strict hurdles of Article 146. That is not an attack on the judiciary — it is the Constitution defending itself,” he added.
Thaddeus Sory
The legal practitioner, Thaddeus Sory, has also questioned why the GBA did not call out former Chief Justice Torkornoo when she demanded a public hearing, despite the Constitution stating that committee hearings must be held in camera.
“Interesting. The same arguments about the absence of clear article 146 rules to regulate the removal process was raised by Kweku Baako in the Supreme Court but the court threw him out. Now, how come the GBA saw nothing wrong with the plain impunity and lawlessness of the former CJ who publicly criticised the committee formed under constitutional provision, over the fact that the proceedings was being done in camera? To thine own self be true,” he wrote on Facebook on September 15, 2025.
Oliver Barker-Vormawor
The social activist and legal practitioner also called out the association, describing its stance as being ‘hypocritical’.
“If the H Kwasi Prempeh report does not remove the GBA from the Constitution, we will rewrite the report again. Time is up for hypocrisy,” he wrote in a Facebook post on September 15, 2025.
Removal of Chief Justice Torkornoo unfair – GBA
In another post, Barker-Vormawor sought to suggest that the association is politically tainted.
“GBA finds its voice to condemn Abronye’s bail ruling by the Circuit Court. We thank God for the constant vigilance anytime the NDC is in power,” he said.
MAG/VPO
Will Ghana pass the Anti-Witchcraft Bill? Find out in the latest episode of The Lowdown on GhanaWeb TV in this conversation with Amnesty International:
