In a forceful and pointed critique, former Special Prosecutor Martin Amidu has cautioned President John Mahama that accepting a judicial resignation from a superior court justice under active constitutional inquiry would not only breach his presidential oath but also undermine the core principles of judicial accountability.
At the heart of Amidu’s argument is Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, which outlines the procedure for removing judges for misbehavior or incompetence.
Amidu argued that once a prima facie case has been established and a committee of inquiry appointed, no resignation should be entertained. Accepting one would, in his words, “violate the Presidential Oath” and potentially suggest underhanded interference in the judicial process.
“The President who accepts such resignation during the pendency of the hearing into the merits of the petition by the committee will be opening himself up to suspicion of having instigated the petition to compel the justice to take the easy way of resignation to avoid accounting for a committed misconduct or acting to save a justice who has indeed violated his or her judicial oath of office by provable misbehaviour warranting removal from office.”
Martin Amidu
According to Amidu, this creates the impression of a political maneuver to shield judges who might be guilty, or worse, orchestrate their removal for political expediency.
Either scenario undermines public trust in the independence of the judiciary and dents the ideal of judicial accountability.
Even more concerning to Amidu is the public dissemination of the petitions and the accompanying responses. He called this act unconstitutional and claims it is part of a broader campaign to pressure the respondent into stepping down.
“The unconstitutional conduct of the leakers… has led to media commentaries urging the respondent to resign,” Amidu said, adding that this strategy is “tacit bargaining to influence the public and the appointed committee.”
Amidu doesn’t mince words in describing what he sees as a dangerous legal culture forming: an argument that judges, once under investigation, can escape scrutiny through resignation.
He called this “despotic and undemocratic,” warning that it is a form of “judicial exceptionalism” that seeks to shield superior court justices from the same public scrutiny every other citizen must endure.
Constitution Faces A Critical Test
Furthermore, Martin Amidu emphasized that judges, empowered with immense authority, must be held accountable through the sole constitutional avenue available—petition and inquiry.
Allowing resignation mid-process, he argued, is not only unfair to petitioners, who have cleared legal hurdles to initiate proceedings, but also constitutes an obstruction of justice.
He references historical precedent to bolster his case. In 2015, Chief Justice Georgina Wood famously refused to let twelve superior court justices under prima facie investigation resign amid the Anas Aremeyaw Anas corruption exposé.
Instead, the inquiry processes proceeded, underscoring the seriousness of judicial accountability.
“The only occasion in Ghana when a justice of the superior court’s resignation was accepted during the pendency of an inquiry by the appointed committee by a Chief Justice after the determination of a prima facie case against the respondent was in the case of the late Mr. Justice Kweku Etrew Amua-Sekyi in 1998 when he was a Supreme Court judge. The recipient of the petition for removal was Chief Justice Philip Archer at the time the complainant lodged the petition.”
Martin Amidu
At the time, President Rawlings accepted the resignation, a move that Amidu vehemently opposed as Deputy Attorney-General.
“When one wounds a snake, one must decapitate it,” he warned, lamenting that Amua-Sekyi was later appointed to head the National Reconciliation Commission, where he allegedly pursued vendettas against those involved in his prior investigation.
The implications of that case remain fresh for Amidu, who insisted the lesson was simple: premature resignation undercuts the rule of law.
In his view, allowing such escape routes empowers those who may have violated their judicial oaths to return to public life without ever answering for their actions—leaving the door open for future abuse.
To this day, he believes Ghana hasn’t learned that lesson. “What is good for the goose is good for the gander,” he said, reminding the nation that consistency in applying the Constitution is essential to preserving the integrity of governance.
Premature Judicial Resignation Cautioned
The former Special Prosecutor further cautioned that any scheme to allow resignation during an inquiry effectively obstructs the constitutional rights of citizen petitioners.
He pointed out that only the appointed committee has the power to end the process—either by concluding that the petition has been abandoned or by clearing the respondent. Any executive shortcut, he argues, is a fundamental breach of due process.
Amidu doesn’t shy away from addressing political undertones either. He acknowledged that the current petitions against a superior court justice have been mired in rumors and accusations from the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP), who claim the process is a political witch-hunt orchestrated by the Mahama administration.
Without evidence, such claims may seem hollow, but Amidu warned that any premature acceptance of a resignation will give those allegations credibility.
“The President… will be abusing his oath of office,” Amidu said, if he accepts a resignation before the committee finishes its work and submits its report. That, he warned, would send the message that the petitioners were acting out of malice rather than civic duty.
As Amidu sees it, allowing the inquiry to play out is the only honorable path forward. If the justice is cleared, resignation afterward may even be welcomed.
But derailing the constitutional process mid-course would not only dishonor the citizen petitioners but also risk a repeat of past failures. “The snake is already wounded. It may, next time, do more damage to the petitioners should the processes be truncated.”
With such a stark warning, the question now is whether President Mahama will heed it—or let history rhyme once more.
READ ALSO: Trump Proposes Major Chinese Tariff Rollback Ahead of Trade Talks
