Private legal practitioner Thaddeus Sory has stated that Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin was a key factor in his client’s petition for the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Sackey Torkonoo.
According to Mr. Sory, the petition specifically cited actions involving the Effutu MP, highlighting behavior that formed a significant part of the case against the former Chief Justice.
He explained that Afenyo-Markin had previously secured an unprecedented court ruling within just two hours from a Supreme Court panel chaired by Justice Torkonoo, an order he claims would be unlikely under normal circumstances in any common law jurisdiction.
Sory further noted that the Minority Leader’s actions created challenges not only for Justice Torkonoo but also for Justice Gabriel Pwamang, who led the committee recommending her removal. He described the senior justice’s treatment as a complicating factor and said Pwamang’s report added to the situation.
The lawyer recounted hearing from individuals familiar with both Afenyo-Markin and Justice Torkonoo. He said they indicated that the Minority Leader and the former Chief Justice came from the same community, with some noting that Afenyo-Markin had hosted visitors during the former Chief Justice’s father’s funeral.
Sory added that had he appeared at the next parliamentary sitting, he would have raised further objections directly against Justice Torkonoo, pointing out that many of the conflicts arose because someone close to her, Afenyo-Markin,was the plaintiff.
The lawyer also alleged that services within the Judicial Service are now linked to the Minority Leader, who allegedly profits commercially from them. He suggested this personal interest explains why Afenyo-Markin has been particularly vocal in opposing the nomination of the current Chief Justice, Baffoe-Bonnie, portraying the process as a national dispute rather than a personal matter.
Sory criticized the current parliamentary approval process for judicial appointments, arguing that the Constitution calls for “prior approval” rather than full-scale vetting. He proposed a more streamlined method where nominees’ CVs and backgrounds are reviewed, with vetting reserved only for specific areas requiring clarification. According to him, unnecessary prolonged processes reduce the procedure to what he called “95% of it is a joke,” while holding both appointees and the nation in limbo.
He concluded that if an appointee fails to perform, the appointing authority retains the power to remove them, making lengthy vetting largely redundant.
Discover more from Hot Stories Ghana
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
