Former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo has filed an application at the Supreme Court seeking a review of orders issued in proceedings related to petitions for her removal from office.
The application, filed under Article 133 of the 1992 Constitution and Rules 54, 55 and 56 of the Supreme Court Rules, asks the apex court to revisit its ruling delivered on May 28, 2026, after it consolidated two related actions before the Court.
Justice Torkornoo argues that the orders made on that date resulted in a miscarriage of justice and denied her the constitutional right to be heard.
Challenge to May 28 proceedings
In a supporting affidavit, the former Chief Justice stated that during case management proceedings, the Court acknowledged that she had no legal representation following the withdrawal of her lawyer, Godfred Yeboah Dame.
According to the affidavit, the Court also noted the absence of the Attorney-General, who is a defendant in both actions before the Court.
Justice Torkornoo contends that despite recognising it could not assume she had been informed of her lawyer’s withdrawal, the Court proceeded to make substantive orders in the matter.
The orders included continuing with the hearing and determination of the case, adopting memoranda of issues filed in both suits, consolidating the actions and subsequently adjourning the matter for judgment.
She argues that these circumstances are exceptional and justify a review of the Court’s decision.
Service of notices questioned
The former Chief Justice also raised concerns about the service of court documents following the May 28 proceedings.
According to her affidavit, the Court directed that she be served with the proceedings and related notices. However, she claims that directive was not followed.
Instead, she alleges that on June 12, 2026, the Registrar served documents on the office of her lawyer in a separate suit, Kwabena Adu-Kusi, rather than serving her personally.
Justice Torkornoo further stated that Adu-Kusi was outside the country at the time the documents were served.
She also claims that subsequent checks at the Court registry revealed that the Registrar had obtained an ex parte order authorising service on the lawyer instead of personal service on her.
Review application before Supreme Court
The application now places the matter back before the Supreme Court, which will determine whether the circumstances raised by the former Chief Justice warrant a review of its earlier orders.
Justice Torkornoo maintains that the issues surrounding legal representation, service of notices and the conduct of the proceedings affected her ability to fully participate in the case and defend her interests.
The review application forms part of the broader legal battle arising from petitions that led to proceedings concerning her removal from office as Chief Justice.
