Resigning is not an option – Chief Justice

Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, the suspended Chief Justice, has said resigning is not an option when the state initiates proceedings against you.

Reacting to some public suggestions that she should resign, she explained that she cannot resign in the wake of the ongoing removal proceedings against her, which she has described as unconstitutional and fundamentally flawed.

Speaking in a public address on Wednesday, June 25, 2025, Justice Torkornoo dismissed suggestions that stepping down would be the most prudent course of action, insisting that doing so would legitimise what she views as a dangerous abuse of the Constitution.

“Resigning or retiring during Article 146 proceedings is not an option for any judge or public official,” she said.

She argued that such a move would compromise the independence of the judiciary and embolden unlawful efforts to remove constitutionally protected officeholders.

“If I resign under these circumstances, I would be endorsing this flawed, opaque, and unlawful process. It is not acceptable,” she stated.

Justice Torkornoo also revealed that she had come under considerable pressure from both personal and external sources, including threats and veiled warnings, urging her to step down.

“I have heard from loved ones, concerned individuals, and others… Many suggest that, since these proceedings appear orchestrated to result in my removal as Chief Justice, I should retire or resign rather than endure an ill-motivated process,” she noted.

“I have also received threats and veiled warnings that, if I do not resign or retire voluntarily, I will suffer harm.”

She made it clear that her decision to remain in office was not motivated by a desire to cling to power, but rather by a duty to uphold judicial independence and defend the constitutional order.

“I am not clinging to a title or position. If I resign, I would be subjecting myself to two injustices: a judgment based on false claims, and the loss of earned entitlements,” she explained.

Justice Torkornoo warned that allowing her removal to proceed unchallenged would set a dangerous precedent for all judges and constitutional officeholders protected under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.

“Behind me stands every judge in the country. Behind me stand every commissioner or head of an independent constitutional body. If this process succeeds, it could be used against anyone,” she cautioned.

She cited a Supreme Court decision (J6/02/2019), which held that public officials subject to Article 146 investigations cannot abandon proceedings midway.

“No one can walk away from proceedings initiated by the state, as judgment can be entered against you for failing to defend yourself,” she said.

The removal process was triggered by three petitions submitted to the President, leading to the formation of a committee in accordance with Article 146. Justice Torkornoo, however, stated that the process has lacked transparency and has been marred by intimidation.

“The situation I face has exposed a model of injustice I would never have thought possible had I not experienced it,” she said.

“It may be that these efforts are designed to frustrate me into resigning… As Chief Justice… I cannot flee when I know the implications of not defending false and unwarranted charges.”

Justice Torkornoo concluded that her decision to stay and fight the proceedings is not for personal gain, but to defend the credibility of Ghana’s democratic institutions.

“If the nation is willing to accept these developments… it must be understood that I sounded a warning, and the nation chose to remain passive,” she stated.