The Attorney-General, Dr. Dominic Ayine has urged an Accra High Court to dismiss a case filed by the suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo.
Documents filed in court by Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem Sai argues that the matters raised by the Chief Justice have been dealt with or remain pending at the Supreme court.
Background
The Chief Justice has in the last few weeks urged the Supreme court and now the High Court to halt her removal process.
She alleges series of rights violation including claims she has not been given a fair idea of the prima facie determination by the President and Council of State.
She also alleges she is subjected to thorough searches during attendance at the committee hearing. She further raises concerns about the participation of Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang in the removal hearings due to his participation in one of the cases forming the basis for one of the petitions.
She therefore wants the High Court to suspend the proceedings.
This action by the Chief Justice is the sixth legal action filed in court since the Presidency announced the receipt of petitions against the now suspended Chief Justice.
Attorney-General Replies
The Attorney-General in court documents listed the cases dealt with by the Supreme Court or which remain pending at the Apex Court.
They include the cases of Her Ladyship, Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo v The Attorney-General & 5 Others, (Suit No.J8/113/2025), Centre for Citizenship Constitutional Electoral Systems LBG(CenCes) v the Attorney-General & 2 Others, (Suit No.J1/20/2025),Vincent Ekow Assafuah v The Attorney-General (Suit No. J1/18/2025), and Ebenezer Osei-Owusu v The Attorney-General (Suit No.J1/19/2025 and Theodore Kofi Atta-Quartey v Attorney-General (Suit No.J8/109/2025).
The A-G believes the High court cannot handle the matter; “That the matters upon which the originating motion and reliefs therein are based on matters which have either been previously decided by the Supreme Court or are properly pending before the Supreme Court for determination. This honourable court ought to exercise its jurisdiction to strike out the Applicant/Respondent’s originating motion for judicial review.”
