Torkornoo's new application doesn't require Supreme Court interpretation – Brako-Powers

A private legal practitioner, Austin Kwabena Brako-Powers, has dismissed suggestions that the Supreme Court must intervene in the judicial review application filed by dismissed Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo at the High Court over her removal as a judge.

In a 3news.com report on Wednesday, September 24, 2025, he argued that neither the application nor Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution raises issues requiring constitutional interpretation.

“In my considered view, the dismissed Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo’s action before the High Court does not call for the intervention of the Supreme Court. The relevant provision, Article 146 of the Constitution (1992), is plain and unambiguous,” he said.

Justice Torkornoo, who was removed from office earlier this year following an impeachment petition, is challenging the decision at the High Court. She maintains that the removal process was targeted at her role as Chief Justice, not as a Justice of the Supreme Court, and therefore insists she still retains her seat on the bench.

Martin Amidu breaks silence on removal of Gertrude Torkornoo

The Attorney-General, Dr Dominic Ayine, however, has opposed the application and requested the High Court to refer certain constitutional questions to the Supreme Court.

He has asked the apex court to determine whether a person removed as Chief Justice can continue serving as a Justice of the Supreme Court, and whether Justice Torkornoo’s appointment as Chief Justice automatically made her an ex-officio member of the Court.

Reacting to this, Brako-Powers said there was no ambiguity to warrant referral to the Supreme Court.

“Not every application that invokes constitutional interpretation genuinely requires it. The Supreme Court has made it clear in its jurisprudence that the mere fact that one party insists that a constitutional issue arises does not automatically make it so,” he noted.

He further dismissed arguments suggesting that the Chief Justice becomes a Supreme Court judge by virtue of the administrative office, describing such claims as a ‘misreading of the law’.

“This raises a crucial question: Is the Chief Justice an ex officio member of the Supreme Court? I do not think so. To argue that Justice Gertrude Torkornoo retained her place on the Supreme Court bench by virtue of her administrative office as Chief Justice is a misreading of the law,” he argued.

According to him, while the Chief Justice has administrative oversight over the Court of Appeal, High Court, and lower courts, it would be ‘legally untenable and absurd’ to extend that reasoning to the Supreme Court.

Akufo-Addo appointed 'babies' as Chief Justice - Ansah Asare

He therefore urged the High Court to hear and determine the matter without referring it to the Supreme Court, stressing that the issues raised fall squarely within its jurisdiction.

MRA/VPO

Our protest aimed at holding President Mahama accountable - NPP’s Abanga says