Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo in her written response to President John Dramani Mahama strongly denied allegations of misconduct and abuse of office brought against her by senior police officer, Ayamga Akolgo, describing them as baseless and lacking grounds for her removal from office.
In his petition to the President, Akolgo alleged that the Chief Justice unilaterally ordered his arrest and detention during court proceedings for merely disagreeing with what he described as “demeaning comments” directed at him. He contends that he committed no criminal offence nor contempt of court to warrant such action.
“She abuses the sacred judicial office by wrongly causing my arrest and detention. The arrest and detention were capricious, unreasonable, unilateral, and without justification,” Akolgo stated, adding that the act constituted “stated misbehavior and incompetence” under Article 146(1) of the Constitution.
Akolgo also accused the Chief Justice of failing to record the incident in the court’s official records and supervising false statements in the search report following his arrest—actions he said amounted to attempts to pervert the course of justice.
But in her formal response dated 7 April 2025, the Chief Justice flatly rejected the claims, insisting that court decisions are collective and not attributable to her as an individual.
“The hearing and proceedings complained about are the proceedings of the Supreme Court… the presiding Judge, whether the Chief Justice or another senior member of the court, is not the court,” she wrote.
Justice Torkornoo acknowledged that if the petitioner felt aggrieved during proceedings, she regretted the experience but insisted that the complaint did not meet the constitutional threshold for judicial misconduct or incompetence.
“I do not hesitate to apologize… if any court user, including the Petitioner, had a bad experience in court while I was presiding,” she noted, but emphasized that “the Petition does not provide any element of misbehavior or incompetence” required under the law for a Chief Justice’s removal.
Addressing the claim that she supervised falsified records, the Chief Justice clarified that manual entries in the Supreme Court Record Book are brief summaries of relevant proceedings and are validated by all judges on the panel. “Further, no Judge manages or administers the electronically captured records of the court. These records are managed by court recorders,” she explained.
She invoked Article 127(3) of the Constitution, which provides that Justices of the Superior Courts are immune from suits or sanctions for actions taken in the exercise of judicial power.
“Because of the weight of article 127 (3), it is respectfully submitted that neither the Chief Justice nor any of the Justices on the panel… may be singled out to be sanctioned,” she added.
Concluding her response, the Chief Justice submitted that Akolgo’s petition fails to establish a prima facie case
“The matters presented in this Petition are unable to lead to a prima facie finding of liability for removal of the Chief Justice.”
Akolgo’s petition is the third in a string of recent attempts to trigger Article 146 impeachment proceedings against Ghana’s Chief Justice.
Read the full Petition and the CJ’s response below
Ayamga Yakubu Akolgo Petition
CJ Response to Ayamga Yakubu Petition