0
0 A presidential staffer, Beatrice Annangfio, has come forward to clarify that the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo was not a politically motivated act orchestrated by the current administration.
The private legal practitioner contended that the legal petition that led to the Chief Justice’s dismissal was rooted in a long and contentious legal history between a petitioner, Daniel Ofori, and Justice Torkornoo, a history that significantly predates the National Democratic Congress (NDC) returning to power.
The controversial dismissal of the Chief Justice on September 1, 2025, sparked immediate condemnation from opposition figures who claimed it was a fulfilment of a campaign promise.
However, Mrs Annangfio refuted this narrative by highlighting the petitioner, businessman Daniel Ofori’s, extensive legal battles with Justice Torkornoo.
“The petitioner, Daniel Ofori, is not a new person to the removed CJ,” Annangfio explained on Channel One TV on Saturday. “He is by far one of the richest businessmen we have in Ghana and a frequent litigant. He has had issues with Madam Gertrude Torkornoo even when she was a High Court judge.”
According to Mrs Annangfio, Mr. Ofori had pursued a case against Ecobank through the entire judicial hierarchy, from the High Court to the Supreme Court, and even a review.
She revealed that in one of her rulings, Justice Torkornoo decided against the businessman. This series of events, the presidential staffer argued, established a clear motive for Ofori’s petition that had nothing to do with the NDC.
“Daniel Ofori later argued that given their history and certain comments made by Justice Torkornoo in other cases, she was likely to be biased against him in any future matter involving Ecobank,” Mrs Annangfio added.
The staffer emphasised that it was misleading to claim that the NDC administration orchestrated Justice Torkornoo’s removal.
“It cannot be that the NDC came to power, and within four months, it was on our agenda to remove the Chief Justice,” she stated, adding that the administration had to act on the recommendation of the Article 146 Committee that was established to investigate the petition.
While the government maintains its constitutional duty to act on the committee’s findings, the dismissal continues to be a point of fierce public and political debate.
The opposing view, championed by legal luminaries like former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo and former Deputy Attorney General Alfred Tuah-Yeboah, argues that the removal was an “unholy assault” on judicial independence and that the allegations against the Chief Justice lacked the gravity to warrant such a severe outcome.
This contrasting perspective underscores the deep political and legal divisions that the event has exposed.
