Ghana’s Deputy Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Dr Justice Srem Sai, has announced that the state will oppose an application for default judgment filed by former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo at the ECOWAS Court of Justice.
The application follows her removal from office after a five-member committee of enquiry, constituted under Article 146 of the Constitution, recommended her dismissal—a recommendation later upheld by President John Dramani Mahama.
The controversy stems from the government’s decision not to file a defence within the 30-day window provided by the court. Explaining the government’s position, Dr Srem Sai said the state had already raised a preliminary objection to the court’s jurisdiction, and until that issue was settled, there was no obligation to file a substantive defence.
According to him, it was reasonable to expect the court to first determine whether it had authority to hear the case before requiring the parties to argue its merits. He stressed that the decision not to file a defense was not an act of negligence but a logical sequence in international litigation.
“Our preliminary thought is that if we are objecting to the jurisdiction of the court, and the court has taken argument and has adjourned to give a ruling one way or the other, we do not exactly think that we have to file on the substantive issue, because the question before the court is whether the court has jurisdiction.
“The court has to clear that aspect first, and when it says that it has jurisdiction to assume, then they will order us to file our defence.”
Ghana’s Deputy Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Dr Justice Srem Sai
In that context, he explained, it was surprising that the government was later served with a notice for default of defense. Dr Srem Sai made clear that the Attorney General’s office would resist the application.
He insisted that the decision not to file a defense was a matter of procedure, not neglect. “Yeah, we would have to file to oppose the application for default judgment,” he said.
Standard for Accountability
Beyond the legal technicalities, the Deputy Attorney General raised broader concerns about standards of accountability for public officials. He questioned why different rules should apply to senior officeholders compared to the President or Parliament.
In his view, neither the President nor Parliament is permitted to disburse public funds at will, and therefore it would be inconsistent to allow a Chief Justice to do so.
He argued that Ghana must make a clear choice as a country on whether to excuse leaders from accountability or to hold them to higher standards.
Drawing from his prosecutorial experience, he stressed that ordinary citizens are often jailed for financial improprieties. It would be unfair, he suggested, for those at the top of the political or judicial hierarchy to be treated more leniently when they should, in fact, be held to stricter standards.
According to Dr Srem Sai, the case is ultimately about what kind of leadership culture Ghana wants to uphold. On one hand, there are arguments that leaders should be allowed some leeway, with the expectation that they return funds if errors occur.
On the other hand, there is a school of thought that insists leaders ought to know better and must be held to account when they breach rules. “This is a national choice we must make,” he emphasised.
Assessing the former Chief Justice’s removal, he expressed confidence in the work of the Article 146 committee. The panel, which included two Supreme Court judges, three other persons, including the former Auditor-General, examined the matter thoroughly and recommended her removal. Dr Srem Sai said he would defer to their appreciation of the standards that applied in the case.
However, the ECOWAS Court is now expected to give further directions on both the jurisdictional objection and the application for default judgment. Until then, the Attorney General’s office is preparing to file processes to ensure the government’s case is properly represented.
For Dr Srem Sai, the stakes in this case go well beyond one individual. At its core, he said, the matter raises fundamental questions about leadership, accountability, and the rule of law in Ghana.
Whether leaders are to be treated as exceptions or held to higher standards is a debate that the country must confront as it strengthens its democratic institutions.
READ ALSO: Atlantic Lithium Secures £28m Financing to Drive Ghana’s First Lithium Mine Forward
