The Member of Parliament for Old Tafo, Honourable Vincent Ekow Assafuah has criticised the handling of his Supreme Court suit challenging the removal process of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, arguing that the outcome has been decided long before the final ruling. His remarks followed the dismissal of legal challenges surrounding the removal process, a decision he said reinforced his long held doubts about judicial fairness in the matter.
Honourable Assafuah stated that his expectations of the final ruling were influenced by events that unfolded from the beginning of the legal process. The Old Tafo MP recalled filing his substantive suit at the Supreme Court on 27 March 2025 to seek clarity on whether the President was required to consult the Chief Justice before initiating removal proceedings.
Additionally, the MP recounted filing an interlocutory injunction to restrain the President from continuing with the process while the substantive matter remained before the court. Thae application, however, failed to secure the relief he sought.
“From the very first day, the signals were clear to me. The court’s conduct and the Executive’s actions suggested there was already a fixed direction for this case, and every subsequent step only reinforced that belief.”
Honourable Vincent Ekow Assafuah
Moreover, he pointed to the establishment of a prima facie case against the former Chief Justice while the injunction application remained pending. In his view, that development raised serious questions about procedural timing and fairness.
The Old Tafo MP further asserted that the sequence of events left little room for meaningful judicial consideration of his arguments. The emphasis, he indicated, shifted away from constitutional reasoning toward a process he believed had a predetermined destination.
Honourable Assafuah insisted that his legal reasoning remained unchanged despite the ruling. He argued that the constitutional questions he raised were significant and deserved fuller judicial scrutiny.
He also stressed that the case carried implications beyond the immediate dispute. In his estimation, the proceedings touched on institutional independence and the standards that govern high level constitutional accountability.
Ultimately, Honourable Assafuah said the ruling confirmed what he had anticipated from the outset. His remarks signalled continued dissatisfaction with the procedural path that led to the removal of the former Chief Justice.
Discontinued Motion Raises Questions Over Judicial Fairness
Questions over judicial procedure deepened after Honourable Assafuah detailed events surrounding his motion to discontinue the Supreme Court suit. He argued that the handling of that application further promotes little confidence in the fairness of the proceedings.
Addressing the issue, the MP revealed that he filed a motion seeking leave to discontinue the case he personally initiated in March 2025. The application, he said, should have been heard independently before judgment in the substantive matter.
According to Honourable Assafuah, the Registrar of the Supreme Court informed him that the Chief Justice would determine a date for hearing the discontinuance motion. That communication, he noted, created an expectation that the motion would receive separate consideration. He also referenced the case involving Bernard Antwi Boasiako, widely known as Wontumi, where procedural motions were heard before scheduled judgments.
“For fairness and common sense, the motion to discontinue should have been heard first. Hearing it on the same day as judgment only deepened my conviction that the outcome had already been settled.”
Honourable Vincent Ekow Assafuah
Furthermore, the MP disclosed that although legal avenues still exist, he has little interest in pursuing them. His reluctance, he explained, stems from his conviction that the central legal question has already been overtaken by events.
The removal of former Chief Justice Torkornoo, he said, rendered the substantive case largely academic. In practical terms, the legal objective of preventing or reviewing the initiation of the removal process no longer carried immediate relevance.
“Once the Chief Justice was removed, the case lost its practical value. At that point, the legal contest became largely academic.”
Honourable Vincent Ekow Assafuah
In light of this, Honourable Assafuah indicated that further litigation would offer limited practical benefit. While acknowledging remaining legal options, he suggested the circumstances no longer justify courtroom battles.
READ ALSO: Southern France Battles Wildfires
