It is difficult to draw a dichotomy between the removal of the Chief Justice and the unbiased posture of President John Mahama based on some comments he and his party made. The judiciary became a punching bag for the NDC and John Mahama during their days in opposition. They believed and perceived that the judiciary was biased and unfair to them in some of the cases that did not go their way.
It will be recalled that after the 2020 election petition, in which the Supreme Court unanimously ruled 7:0 in favor of Akufo-Addo and the NPP, John Mahama, addressing the country and his party members, called the Supreme Court a “Unanimous FC”. I had heard party foot soldiers referencing the Supreme Court in this manner, but for it to be elevated by a former president who had benefited from a similar fate in the 2012 election petition, for me, was one of the lowest moments a beneficiary could speak like that.
The mantra of the NDC for the 2024 general election was “resetting Ghana,” where they mentioned they would reset the judiciary and other state institutions because they believed those institutions are corrupt or have some political leanings.
I am not a lawyer, but it does not prevent me from commenting on legal issues. After all, the 1992 constitution was not written by lawyers but ordinary citizens. I have heard many people make the argument that the president is just a conveyor belt and that he was just doing what the committee he instituted had given to him. I don’t have a problem with the president doing his duty but, we cannot begin from here. We will have to look at the language of the president and his party when they were in opposition and what they are doing when they assumed office. When we are able to draw these juxtapositions, then we can make some informed commentaries.
I find it absolutely ridiculous and absurd for the reason for which the Chief Justice was removed. I have heard it was based on some gross misconduct of the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo. What misconduct? I hope we are not opening the Pandora’s box for more flurries of frivolous and vexatious petitions in the future.
What this means is that we are to expect any “lunatic” who feels the court did not treat him or her well to petition the president for the removal of a Chief Justice or a Judge just because the case could not go the petitioner’s way.
The subtle introduction of politics into the judiciary should be a concern for every Ghanaian. The court is the last hope for us as citizens. Many Ghanaians do not believe in the executive arm of government and parliament because they think those arms are overtly partisan and do not have the country at heart. The only hope we have now is the judiciary, and if we allow these politicians to manipulate it then our democracy will be wobbly.
The prime argument I have heard the government and its communicators make to justify this “uncalled” process was the removal of the then Electoral Commission Chairperson by Akufo-Addo. Even though I believe Akufo-Addo must be blamed for that coward decision to have fired Charlotte Osei from office and in doing so opened the Pandora’s box for subsequent impunity to happen. The issue about the Chief Justice is different and must not be compared to the removal of the EC chair.
The Judiciary is an arm of government and must enjoy its independence as it has been enshrined in the Constitution. The process in getting a Chief Justice is not the same as an Electoral Commissioner. One is an arm of government, and the other is not.
With the removal of the Chief Justice, the foundation of our democracy has been shaken and tested, and it will be very difficult for these unscrupulous things not to happen again. As citizens, we must call out this intimidation and manipulation of the judicial system by politicians who want everything to satisfy their whims and caprices.
With the clandestine move into the judiciary, very soon these politicians will enter our kitchens and tell us what to cook.
After about eight months into office, Mahama has done so well with most of the decisions he has taken, but I honestly think he got it wrong for this one. The reason is that some of these things are bound to happen, and his name will be referenced. He will go down as the president who has removed a chief justice under this fourth republic. Even in military regimes, the court was not attacked; how much more in a democracy?
*****
Author: Sampson Boamah (boamah.sampson34@gmail.com)
About the Author
