Bin the cacophony, trust the process —Thaddeus Sory

Cut through the noise — Focus on the substance

Legal practitioner Thaddeus Sory is urging a return to sober reflection and constitutional clarity amid the swirling noise surrounding the invocation of Article 146 of Ghana’s Constitution. In an op-ed titled “Bin the cacophony — Trust the process,” Sory calls for a shift away from political hysteria and back to the rule of law, challenging media commentators to elevate the national discourse on judicial accountability.

“Let’s dedicate our Saturday morning discussions to what I will, for present purposes, call the more serious matters,” he writes, urging media colleagues to focus less on speculative narratives and more on the constitutional realities at play.

Article 146: Familiar territory, not uncharted waters

At the center of the storm is Article 146 — a constitutional provision detailing how complaints against judges and justices are handled. Sory reminds the public that this article is not new, nor is its current application unprecedented.

“This provision has been invoked in multiple instances — well before the case of Charlotte Osei,” he notes. In each of those past instances, the process was respected, the outcomes accepted, and the system functioned as intended. Why then, he asks, the sudden outrage now?

A case of double standards?

Sory’s central concern is a perceived inconsistency in how Ghanaians react to the same constitutional mechanism depending on the personalities involved. He poses pointed rhetorical questions:

Was justice not served before?

Was Article 146 not constitutional then?

If we trusted the process then, why not now?

Is the uproar about the law — or about who is affected?

By raising these questions, Sory highlights what he sees as an emerging culture of selective outrage — one that risks undermining confidence in the judiciary itself.

Constitutional order vs. Political chicanery

In addressing suggestions of political manipulation, Sory takes an uncompromising stance: if we now question the integrity of this process, are we not casting doubt on every previous use of Article 146?

Even in the face of a hypothetical “resetting” political agenda, he argues, the current process stands out precisely because it is being carried out by the book — a sharp contrast to other historical dismissals that bypassed legal procedure altogether.

“Isn’t that what we’ve always demanded?” he challenges.

Trust the system — Not the individual

The lawyer also pushes back against the idea that judicial credibility is vested in any one individual. While acknowledging the contributions of the judge at the center of the current debate, Sory warns against romanticizing personalities to the detriment of institutions.

“To suggest that the judiciary is only credible with the presence of one person,” he writes, “is to insult the very institution we claim to defend.”

The Judiciary on trial — Again?

Sory’s article doesn’t shy away from confronting the elephant in the room: a growing perception that the judiciary is compromised. He notes that those who once swore by the impartiality of the courts are now crying foul.

“To dignify these current reactions with extended airtime is to lend weight to suspicions that have always existed,” he warns, alluding to political rhetoric around “clearing” allegations and eroding trust.

A call to the media: Elevate the conversation

In a direct appeal to respected journalists and media houses, Sory names Joy FM’s Newsfile and TV3’s The Key Points, urging them to redirect public debate toward substance and seriousness.

“Do something more meaningful,” he pleads, calling for discussions anchored in legal literacy, not political convenience.

Conclusion: Consistency is the backbone of credibility

In the final analysis, Sory’s message is simple but powerful: uphold the same standards across the board. If Ghanaians truly believe in constitutional democracy, then Article 146 must be trusted — not only when it aligns with personal or political preferences, but especially when it doesn’t.

“Let’s not cry foul now that the very system we claimed to trust is doing its work,” he concludes. “Let us trust the process. We always have.”