High Court rules against suspended CJ

In a decisive ruling delivered on July 31, 2025, the Human Rights Division of the Accra High Court dismissed the judicial review application filed by Ghana’s suspended Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo. The court not only struck down the application but issued a scathing critique, labeling it an “abuse of court processes” and stating that it lacked the necessary jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

This judgment is the latest legal blow in a series of setbacks for Justice Torkornoo as she attempts to halt ongoing constitutional proceedings aimed at her removal from office.

What constitutes abuse of court processes?

By invoking the term “abuse of court processes,” the High Court accused Justice Torkornoo of using the judicial system not as a means of legitimate redress but as a tool to delay or obstruct justice. In legal terms, this refers to the improper use of court procedures to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or achieve objectives beyond those the court process is designed for.

The implication is clear: the court believed Justice Torkornoo’s application was more strategic than substantive, crafted not to challenge legal wrongs but to stall constitutionally mandated proceedings.

Mounting legal hurdles for the CJ

This ruling narrows the legal path available to Justice Torkornoo, who has been fighting to challenge the inquiry into her possible removal. It follows a prior setback in May 2025, when the Supreme Court unanimously rejected her request for an injunction to suspend the work of a five-member investigative committee.

The consistent judicial stance — from both the High Court and Supreme Court — appears to be a firm rejection of efforts to delay the constitutional process laid out for evaluating petitions against top judicial officers.

Background: Petitions, suspension, and controversy

Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, Ghana’s 15th Chief Justice and the third woman to hold the office, has faced sustained legal and political pressure since assuming the role on June 12, 2023. Under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, petitions were lodged with the President requesting her removal from office — triggering a constitutionally prescribed investigation process.

According to the Constitution, the President must refer such petitions to a committee, appointed in consultation with the Council of State, to examine their merit. It is this process that Justice Torkornoo has repeatedly challenged, claiming it is being used improperly and with political motivations.

A defiant public stance

Despite the legal defeats, Justice Torkornoo has remained defiant. In a press conference held on June 25, 2025, she called the ongoing proceedings “flawed,” “politically driven,” and “unconstitutional.” She also declared that she would not resign, asserting that stepping down would amount to legitimising “an unconstitutional and cruel process.”

Perhaps most alarmingly, she alleged that she had received “veiled threats” to resign voluntarily — suggesting efforts were underway to pressure her into stepping aside without due process.

Implications and what lies ahead

While the full text of the High Court’s judgment is still pending, its dismissal of the judicial review underscores a judicial consensus: procedural challenges will not be entertained if they are perceived as attempts to derail constitutionally sanctioned investigations.

With few legal avenues remaining, Chief Justice Torkornoo’s fight may now hinge more on public opinion and the integrity of the investigative committee’s findings than on courtroom victories.

Her case is shaping up to be a defining moment in Ghana’s judicial and constitutional history — raising critical questions about the balance between judicial independence and accountability, as well as the boundaries of legal recourse for top officeholders.