Former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo attempted to negotiate a retirement arrangement with President John Mahama before challenging her removal through the courts, according to revelations from a prominent lawyer involved in the case.
Abraham Amaliba, a member of the National Democratic Congress legal team, disclosed on TV3’s KeyPoints program that Torkornoo had worked through two prominent intermediaries to seek an arrangement allowing her to retire with full entitlements rather than face the removal process.
President Mahama removed Torkornoo from office on September 1, 2025, just hours after receiving the report from a five-member committee that investigated three petitions calling for her dismissal. The committee recommended her removal based on findings of established misbehavior.
According to Amaliba’s account, the former Chief Justice initially pursued diplomatic channels to resolve the matter before the formal removal proceedings concluded. However, he indicated that while these retirement discussions were ongoing, Torkornoo simultaneously pursued legal action to contest the removal process.
The revelation comes amid ongoing debate about the circumstances surrounding Torkornoo’s departure from Ghana’s highest judicial office. Torkornoo was initially suspended on April 22, 2025, following a preliminary investigation that found sufficient grounds for a formal inquiry into her conduct.
Legal expert Martin Kpebu has emphasized that removal from judicial office carries significant consequences for pension and entitlement arrangements. He explained that dismissal implies liability for breaching official conduct rules, which affects post-service benefits.
The former Chief Justice’s removal followed a comprehensive investigation process. The committee, chaired by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, examined evidence from 25 witnesses and involved eight lawyers in compiling over 1,000 pages of documentation.
During a recent panel discussion, lawyer Ansa-Asare suggested that on humanitarian grounds, Torkornoo should have been permitted to retire after serving 21 years in the judicial service. Amaliba countered that the former Chief Justice had effectively eliminated that option through her own actions.
The constitutional removal process followed Article 146 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, which outlines procedures for investigating and removing senior judicial officers. The President acted on the committee’s recommendations after receiving their comprehensive report on the petitions submitted against Torkornoo.
The case has generated significant public discourse about judicial accountability and the balance between constitutional processes and humanitarian considerations in high-profile removals. Legal observers note that the formal investigation process, once initiated, must follow constitutional procedures regardless of parallel diplomatic efforts.
Torkornoo’s removal marks a significant development in Ghana’s judicial history, as she became the first Chief Justice to be formally dismissed through the constitutional removal process. Her departure has prompted discussions about judicial independence and executive-judiciary relations.
The revelations about attempted retirement negotiations add complexity to the narrative surrounding her exit, suggesting efforts to find alternative solutions before the constitutional process reached its conclusion. However, the simultaneous pursuit of court challenges while retirement discussions continued has drawn criticism from some quarters.
The former Chief Justice’s case underscores the tension between formal constitutional procedures and informal diplomatic resolutions in sensitive judicial matters. Legal experts continue debating the precedent set by the removal and its implications for future judicial accountability processes.
The constitutional removal process, while rare in Ghana’s democratic history, demonstrates the mechanisms available for addressing concerns about judicial conduct at the highest levels of the country’s court system.
