Minister of Justice and Attorney-General, Dr. Dominic Ayine, has staunchly defended President John Mahama’s decision to proceed with consultations with the Council of State regarding petitions to remove Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, despite a pending application for an interlocutory injunction.
Dr. Ayine’s remarks counter claims by Godfred Yeboah Dame, counsel for Vincent Assafuah, Member of Parliament for Old Tafo, who argued that the President should suspend the consultation process until the court rules on the injunction application.
Dame’s Legal Argument
Appearing in court on April 9, 2025, Godfred Dame asserted that halting the consultations is essential to uphold the rule of law. According to him, the legal principle forbids any party from continuing processes subject to a pending interlocutory injunction.
“There’s an application for an interlocutory injunction pending, so why would anybody proceed? It would be quite alarming and a clear disregard for the rule of law if they [the President and Council of State] were to move forward with this process,” Dame stated.
Dame further emphasized that by proceeding without addressing the injunction, the President risks undermining judicial independence and violating due process.
Ayine Rebuts
However, speaking to journalists on April 16, 2025, Dr. Ayine dismissed Dame’s position, emphasizing that the President’s constitutional duty cannot be hindered by an injunction application yet to be determined by the court.
“First of all, the court has not issued an order stopping the President from performing his constitutional obligation,” Dr. Ayine argued. “The law is very clear: you cannot enjoin the performance of a constitutional or public duty. What point is he [Dame] trying to make? That the President must preemptively suspend his actions without a court ruling?”
Dr. Ayine maintained that the Constitution expressly mandates the President to consult the Council of State in such matters, and no individual or authority has the legal grounds to obstruct this duty.
The Case Against the Process
Vincent Assafuah’s suit challenges the constitutional validity of President Mahama’s actions, arguing that the Chief Justice was denied a fair hearing before the consultations began. Assafuah, represented by Dame, contends that initiating consultations with the Council of State without first seeking the Chief Justice’s response contravenes Article 146(6) of the 1992 Constitution.
According to the petition, the failure to grant the Chief Justice an opportunity to address the allegations undermines her rights and the independence of the judiciary.
Assafuah is seeking an interlocutory injunction to temporarily halt the President’s consultations until these procedural concerns are addressed.
Supreme Court Postpones Hearing
The Supreme Court has scheduled May 6, 2025, to hear the injunction application. A panel of four, chaired by Justice Osei Bonsu, announced the postponement on April 16 due to the absence of Justice Samuel Asiedu, the fifth panel member.
“The adjournment is due to an unavoidable reason,” Justice Osei Bonsu stated.
This delay further intensifies the legal and political drama surrounding the attempt to remove Chief Justice Torkornoo, a matter that has drawn significant public and legal scrutiny.
Implications
The unfolding legal battle raises critical questions about the intersection of constitutional obligations, judicial independence, and procedural fairness. While Dame insists on the primacy of due process, Ayine underscores the inviolability of presidential duties as outlined in the Constitution. As the nation awaits the Supreme Court’s ruling, the outcome could set a precedent for future interactions between the executive and judiciary in Ghana.
Story by: Mercy Addai Turkson #ahotoronline.com
