Lawyer and NDC communicator Hamza Suhuyini Sayibu has launched a direct critique of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), questioning its refusal to take legal action against President John Dramani Mahama over the suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo.
In an emphatic rebuttal to the GBA’s statements and in defence of the President, he accused the association of political inconsistency and lack of principle in its handling of the matter. Suhuyini challenged the GBA to prove its accusations of unconstitutionality in court, highlighting what he described as a hypocritical stance by the Association.
“They indicated to the whole nation that their responsibility includes protecting and defending the 1992 constitution. They said if his Excellency President Mahama fails to withdraw the suspension, they would head to the court. Why are they not in court now? Why is the GBA not in court?”
Hamza Suhuyini Sayibu, Lawyer and NDC Communicator
He also recounted the GBA’s initial advice for all parties to refrain from public commentary on the matter because it was sub judice, only for them to turn round and break the silence by their resolution, where they stated the President’s action was illegal.
Suhuyini, baffled, heavily quizzed the GBA’s one month delay in resorting to their next course of action as promised, reiterating that President Mahama acted fully within his constitutional powers under Article 146.
He pointed to a 2016 Supreme Court ruling that validated President Mahama’s past judicial appointments, where the court sided with the President over the GBA in interpreting his role in the appointment process.
“The GBA was openly embarrassed by him – because at the end of the day, the Apex Court of the land indicated that his Excellency President Mahama had good counsel and perhaps a better appreciation of our constitutional dictates more than the Ghana Bar Association”
Hamza Suhuyini Sayibu, Lawyer and NDC Communicator
Referencing that ruling, Suhuyini contended the GBA’s current position lacks constitutional backing but is instead influenced by politics, and hence the actual reason for their delay in going to court – fearing another humiliating defeat.
“They know the president they are dealing with,” he further asserted, praising President Mahama’s depth of legal and constitutional knowledge despite not being a lawyer himself.
Double Standards
Suhuyini took issue with what he described as the GBA’s history of legal missteps and inconsistency, calling their judgement into serious question.
“We are talking about an association that proceeded to institute what it called the Senior Advocates of Ghana Award, where they were illegally giving awards to certain practitioners. It took Ward-Brew to question the legitimacy of that particular award”
Hamza Suhuyini Sayibu, Lawyer and NDC Communicator
In this instance, he accused the GBA of abandoning principle in favour of political expediency, stating that their current posturing stands in contradiction to their earlier refusal to comment on similar matters.
He wondered how and why a group that had difficulty in expressing their views on other Article 146 proceedings, ranging from that of former Electoral Commission (EC) chairperson Charlotte Osei to Justice Paul Dery and former CHRAJ boss Luaretta Lamptey, has suddenly found their voice.
Though Suhuyini commended the GBA on breaking its long silence, whatever the reason, he charged the Association to “stick to principle,” in their assessment of and contributions to the issue of the suspended Chief Justice.
Moving on, Hamza Suhuyini cited Frank Davies, legal committee chair of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), as someone who had recently acknowledged that President Mahama acted in line with Article 146 in dealing with Justice Gertrude Torkornoo.
“Nothing untoward has occurred,” he noted, suggesting that the GBA must be mimicking the NPP’s political strategy of crying foul rather than upholding the law.
No Bad Precedent
Dismissing suggestions that Mahama’s suspension of the Chief Justice set a “dangerous precedent,” Suhuyini questioned the GBA’s understanding of the concept. “What is the bad precedent? Is this the first time that someone has been suspended using Article 146?” he asked.
He also argued that the President’s action, supported by the Council of State, was constitutionally sound and necessary to ensure a fair investigation. Suhuyini further justified the need for the suspension by explaining the potential conflicts of interest that could arise during the investigation if the Chief Justice remained in office.
“Imagine a situation where you would have the Chief Justice still presiding over the Judiciary and the committee proceeding to call people who work under her for questioning. Would you get the semblance of a fair trial process as far as the inquiry is concerned? Obviously not”
Hamza Suhuyini Sayibu, Lawyer and NDC Communicator
Hamza Suhuyini’s criticism adds a political layer to the legal conversation around Justice Torkornoo’s suspension.
While the Ghana Bar Association has not taken legal action yet, its call for a reconsideration continues to fuel public discourse on the limits of presidential power and the independence of the judiciary.
READ MORE: Hubtel Dominates 2025 Digital Innovation Awards with Four Major Wins Celebrating
