- Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo has been dismissed by President John Mahama following the submission of a report by a five-member committee chaired by Justice Gabriel Pwamang.
- The committee reviewed three petitions but based its recommendation solely on the one filed by businessman Daniel Ofori.
- The inquiry involved 25 witnesses and over 10,000 pages of evidence. Justice Torkornoo testified personally and was cross-examined.
- The committee concluded that the evidence supported her removal under constitutional provisions.
President John Dramani Mahama has officially removed Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo from office, acting on the recommendation of a five-member committee tasked with investigating petitions for her removal.
The committee, chaired by Supreme Court Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, submitted its findings on September 1, 2025, after months of closed-door proceedings. Although three separate petitions were referred to the panel, the report focused exclusively on the one filed by businessman Daniel Ofori.
The inquiry was extensive. Both parties — the petitioner and the Chief Justice — presented a combined total of 25 witnesses. Justice Torkornoo not only called expert witnesses but also testified in person and underwent cross-examination. The committee reviewed approximately 10,000 pages of documentary evidence before reaching its conclusion.
Justice Pwamang, while presenting the report to the President, emphasized that each petition was treated independently and assessed on its own merits. The committee’s recommendation was based on a detailed evaluation of the first petition, which alleged misconduct and administrative overreach.
Following the submission, President Mahama acted swiftly, signing off on the recommendation and ending Justice Torkornoo’s tenure as head of Ghana’s judiciary. The decision marks a rare and dramatic shift in the country’s legal leadership, with further reports expected on the remaining two petitions.
Below are his exact words:
“As I have said above, three petitions were referred to us, and though all three petitions seek the same relief, each petition is distinct and will succeed or fail on its individual strengths or weaknesses, Mr President, without disclosing the substance of the proceedings. And since in-camera proceedings are not the same as in secret, we can state that in respect of the first petition, we received evidence by Mr Daniel Ofori, the 1st petitioner, through 13 witnesses.
“Similarly, the Chief Justice, in her defence, called 12 witnesses, including expert witnesses, as she is entitled to do under the Constitution. The Chief Justice testified personally and was cross-examined. The Committee received about 10,000 pages of documentary evidence from both sides. There were four lawyers that represented the first petitioner, Daniel, and four lawyers who represented the Chief Justice. “Mr President, after critical and dispassionate examination and assessment of all evidence, including the expert evidence, against the provisions of the Constitution and the right values we have, without fear or favour, we arrived at a recommendation on the first petition.”
