Torkonoo demands $10m compensation for alleged reputational damage

Details of the suit filed by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo at the ECOWAS Court have revealed the demand for a staggering $10 million in compensation for alleged moral and reputational damages.

The Chief Justice’s extensive filing seeks a series of declarations and orders, fundamentally challenging the legitimacy of her suspension and the ongoing constitutional process for her potential removal from office.

This marks the first time in Ghana’s history that a sitting Chief Justice has faced such a process, making every legal manoeuvre a subject of intense scrutiny.

Justice Torkornoo’s suit, confirmed by sources close to the judiciary, asserts that her suspension by President John Dramani Mahama on April 22, 2025, constitutes a grave violation of her fundamental human rights as enshrined in the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right

Among the key declarations sought by the Chief Justice are:

A declaration that her suspension violated her human right to a fair hearing (Article 7 of the African Charter).

A declaration that the panel constituted by Ghana to investigate allegations of misconduct against her was not set up to guarantee its independence and impartiality, thereby violating her right to a fair hearing.

A declaration that her suspension violated her human right to fair, equitable, and satisfactory conditions of work (Article 15 of the African Charter).

A declaration that her suspension has exposed her to public ridicule and odium, both locally and internationally, constituting a violation of her human right to dignity (Article 5 of the African Charter).

A declaration that by subjecting her to an “illegal and unfair investigation and trial” since April 2025, Ghana has inflicted injuries on her professional standing and image, exposing her and her family to “immeasurable public ridicule.”

Beyond these declarations, Chief Justice Torkornoo is seeking crucial orders from the regional court, including:

The legal action is the latest development in a saga that began when President Mahama suspended Chief Justice Torkornoo under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.

This article outlines the procedure for the removal of Justices of the Superior Courts, requiring a prima facie case to be established by the Council of State before a committee of inquiry is established.

This is the first time in Ghana’s 68-year history that a Chief Justice has faced such removal proceedings, underscoring the gravity and high-stakes nature of the case.

The Chief Justice had previously challenged aspects of the removal process in Ghana’s domestic courts, including the Supreme Court and the High Court. While her injunction application against the Committee of Inquiry was dismissed by the Supreme Court on admissibility grounds in May 2025, the substantive constitutional arguments regarding the legality of the process in Ghana are still pending.

The decision to approach the ECOWAS Court of Justice, a regional human rights tribunal with jurisdiction over alleged human rights violations in member states, has sparked debate among Ghanaian legal experts.

While some argue that domestic remedies must be exhausted before seeking international recourse, the ECOWAS Court’s jurisprudence, as highlighted by legal practitioners, has consistently allowed individuals to file cases even if parallel domestic proceedings are ongoing, provided the matter is not before another international court.

This unprecedented suit against the state, particularly involving the head of the judiciary, carries significant implications for judicial independence, constitutional governance, and public trust in Ghana.

The ECOWAS Court’s handling of this high-profile case will be closely watched, as it could set significant precedents for the accountability of high-ranking state officials and the application of regional human rights instruments across West Africa.