He said a cursory reading of the Constitutional provision governing the removal of a Chief Justice and judicial pronouncements showed President Mahama did nothing wrong in referring the three petitions to the Council of State for its advice.

“We need to exercise restraint when commenting on matters of constitutional importance because it is easy to stray into nothingness. The law on removing a Superior Court judge and Chief Justice is circumscribed in Article 146(6) and case law, and I am convinced President Mahama is acting within his powers,” the lawyer said in a Facebook post on March 27, 2025.

Read Also: Chief Justice requests copies of petitions seeking her removal from office

The Minister for Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, said President Mahama had forwarded three petitions seeking the removal of the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo.

The statement has generated public discussions, with some commentators claiming the President should have sent the petitions to the Chief Justice for her comments before referring them to the Council of State.

Two Ghanaians, including the Old Tafo Member of Parliament, Vincent Ekow Assafuah, have filed separate actions at the Supreme Court seeking various reliefs to challenge President Mahama’s decision.

However, reacting to the development, Mr Brako-Powers said the authorities do not impose a duty on the President to take comments of the embattled Chief Justice before seeking the advice of the Council of State.

“I have heard people say that President Mahama was to have sent the three petitions to Chief Justice Torkornoo and received her comments before referring them to the Council of State. Where are they reading this from? Has President Mahama established a prima facie case yet? Has President Mahama denied the Chief Justice her constitutional right to a fair hearing with his action?” the lawyer quizzed.

Mr Brako-Powers said the people who fault the President for referring the three petitions to the Council of State have exhibited “an apparent misreading of the law and a dishonest appreciation of case law on the subject.”

“As much as I agree that the President ought to serve copies of the three petitions on Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo to be aware of their existence and prepare her defence if need be, I don’t think her comments would be required at this stage before the President establishes prima facie case or whether the petitions merit attention at all,” lawyer Brako-Powers said.

The private legal practitioner said the Chief Justice would “indeed” be given a hearing if the President decides to investigate the complaints against her.

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.