Retired Supreme Court Justice William Atuguba has defended the constitutional procedure used to remove Ghana’s Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, stating that due process was followed throughout the proceedings.
Speaking in a television interview Monday, Justice Atuguba confirmed that President John Mahama and the Council of State properly complied with Article 146 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution in removing Torkornoo from office.
“Oh yes, that was the procedure followed…culminating in her removal, that was followed, yes,” Atuguba said during the TV3 interview, endorsing the constitutional process that concluded September 1, 2025.
Chief Justice Torkornoo was removed following recommendations from a five-member committee chaired by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang. The committee cited multiple allegations including inappropriate payment of per diem allowances to her husband and daughter.
The removal process began in March 2025 when President Mahama received three petitions against the Chief Justice, leading to her suspension in April. Torkornoo had served as Ghana’s 15th Chief Justice since June 2023.
Justice Atuguba explained that the constitutional term “stated misbehaviour” requires no complex interpretation, describing it as conduct that ordinary, fair-minded people would find unacceptable. He noted that Article 146 has been invoked previously in removing other high-profile officials including former CHRAJ Commissioner Loretta Lamptey and ex-Electoral Commissioner Charlotte Osei.
“Stated misbehavior really doesn’t depend on what I conceive it to be, but what we as a society looking at charges, allegations leveled against her,” Atuguba explained. “Misbehavior is not different from misconduct. It means unacceptable behavior, incorrect behavior.”
The former justice emphasized that the constitutional provision, while not explicitly defined, follows ordinary English meaning and societal standards of acceptable conduct for public officials.
Torkornoo, 61, was the third woman to serve as Ghana’s Chief Justice. Her removal marks a significant development in Ghana’s judiciary, with the constitutional process attracting scrutiny over its adherence to due process requirements.
The case highlights the application of Ghana’s constitutional mechanisms for removing senior judicial officers, demonstrating the operational framework established by the 1992 Constitution for addressing allegations of misconduct against top judicial officials.
Justice Atuguba’s endorsement of the procedure provides judicial perspective on the constitutional validity of the process, reinforcing that established legal frameworks were properly observed throughout the removal proceedings.
