Prominent constitutional lawyer Thaddeus Sory has rebutted several claims made by suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo during a press conference held earlier on Wednesday June 26, 2025.
The Chief Justice, currently facing three petitions for her removal under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, insisted that resignation is not an option and raised several concerns about the legality and fairness of the ongoing proceedings against her.
However, in a response, Thaddeus Sory dismantled each of her assertions, arguing that many of her claims reflect a “worrying misunderstanding” of the law particularly for someone of her standing in the judiciary.
Justice Torkornoo had stated that she requested a public hearing for the Article 146 proceedings. In response, Sory questioned how the Chief Justice could ignore multiple Supreme Court rulings that have clearly established that Article 146 proceedings must be held in camera.
He cited cases such as Justice Dery v Tiger Eye PI, Agyei Twum v A-G, and GBA v Attorney-General, which all affirm this constitutional principle.
The Chief Justice also lamented the Supreme Court’s decision to strike out her supplementary affidavit, claiming it was unjust.
However, Sory reminded her that in a recent LGBTQ case, she had herself ordered the striking out of an affidavit filed on behalf of the Speaker of Parliament without identifying any offensive content.
“Has the Chief Justice so soon forgotten her own rulings on affidavits?” Sory asked rhetorically.
Torkornoo claimed that the petitioners did not have a direct interest in the allegations against her and that she was not given copies of the petition.
Sory countered by questioning what material she responded to that led to the establishment of a prima facie case in the first place. He further argued that the Chief Justice seemed unaware of the Agyei Twum decision, which holds that no locus standi is required in such petitions.
He also rejected her claim that the hearings should follow the Commissions of Inquiry (Practice and Procedure) Rules, 2010 (C.I. 65), pointing out that Article 146 committees are ad hoc bodies, free to determine their own procedures, as held by Justice Sophia Akuffo in the Agyei Twum case.
Responding to Torkornoo’s claim that proceedings are being held in a “high-security zone” at Castle Drive, Sory noted that previous Article 146 cases including those involving Charlotte Osei and superior court justices were held in judicial facilities, but those were all under her own tenure as Chief Justice.
“Does she not know this one is not under her auspices?” Sory stated, noting that her surprise about the venue is misplaced.
During her press conference, Chief Justice Torkornoo stated that resigning would be tantamount to fleeing from accountability. She claimed to have received threats and pressure to retire prematurely.
“Resigning or retiring while Article 146 proceedings are ongoing is not even a legally available option,” she noted.
However, Sory criticized what he called her “sanctimonious political posturing,” stating that her public remarks betray a lack of candor, depth in basic legal principles, and fidelity to constitutional law.
Justice Torkornoo was suspended by President John Dramani Mahama following a prima facie determination by the Judicial Council on three petitions filed against her.
A five-member committee has since been appointed to investigate the allegations.
