AG urges SC interpretation on Torkornoo’s removal as a judge
Justice Torkornoo was removed from office as Chief Justice and as a Justice of the Supreme Court on September 1, 2025, after a committee set up under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution found her guilty of stated misbehaviour.
.jpeg)
The Attorney General has filed a motion at the High Court requesting that the constitutional implications of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo’s removal be referred to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
Justice Torkornoo was removed from office as Chief Justice and as a Justice of the Supreme Court on September 1, 2025, after a committee set up under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution found her guilty of stated misbehaviour. She has since initiated an action at the High Court challenging her removal as a Supreme Court judge.
At the hearing of the originating motion, Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai prayed the court to refer three key constitutional questions for interpretation:
Whether a person may retain their previous judicial office upon appointment as Chief Justice.
Whether the Chief Justice’s membership of the Superior Courts of Judicature is ex officio.
Whether a person may retain membership of the Superior Courts of Judicature after being removed as Chief Justice.
In an affidavit, the AG argued that the President’s inclusion of “Justice of the Supreme Court” in the Warrant of Removal was intended to clarify the proper constitutional position. The AG also denied the factual allegations raised in Torkornoo’s affidavit, except where expressly admitted.
