The Appointments Committee of Parliament, will today Monday November 10 vet the nominee for the Chief Justice (CJ) position, Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie.
The most senior judge of the Supreme Court, has been in acting capacity since April 2025 after his predecessor, Justice Gertrude Araba Sackey Torkornoo, was suspended and later removed from office after a 5-member committee put together to investigate her accused her on grounds of stated misdemeanor.
The 69-year old was nominated by President John Dramani Mahama in September 2025, at a time Parliament was on break. Last week when the decision was announced on the floor of Parliament, the minority side vehemently opposed it.
Their leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, stressed that there was no need for the exercise to be carried out because the removed CJ is back in court challenging the decision handed her.
The Effutu constituency Member of Parliament (MP), argued that Justice Torkornoo is not only in Ghana’s courts, she is also at the ECOWAS court seeking some declarations.
He believes the outcome may likely change the current state of affairs and so vetting to replace her will be unfair and interfering in the work of the judiciary. He did not see the need to rush the process, urging the House to exercise restraint until the court processes are done with.
He faulted the decision because the Business Committee report which contained the vetting decision was not supposed to have it in the first place.
“We are here to approve the Business Committee’s report as a House and the rules allow us to amend, modify the report that is presented to us. It is my contention that in view of precedence of the this House in respect of matters involving subjudicate, this House cannot be invited to accept the vetting of the nominee for the office of the Chief Justice when indeed there are pending constitutional matters before the Supreme Court of this republic and before the ECOWAS court. Justice for the avoidance of doubt and to lay a proper foundation for the submission I here to fore make shall rely on the official report of this make dated the 5th of March 2025 ……….
The point I am making is that there are two grounds on which I am raising the objection, the first grounds is that under our constitution we must not interfere in the works of the judiciary. So if the judiciary is seized with the matter, Parliament should not also take up that same matter and refer to it as Human Rights committee. Parliament will be interfering with the work of the judiciary. Under the constitution, we owe the judiciary not to interfere with their work and my argument is that we’ve taken up the matter and referring it to our Human Rights Committee and that will be interfering—– that is my first argument”.
Afenyo-Markin said the Majority Leader was aware the international court is about to give it ruling but the side is doing everything to shut it eyes on what is about to happen.
“The Majority leader is telling us that as part of the Business Committee report has as part it the vetting of the nominee on Monday the 10th of November when he is aware the ECOWAS court has scheduled the 18th of November for the ruling in the matter brought before it. What does this house want to hurry to, why are we in a haste to render the case nugatory to deny the woman, the Chief Justice of the Republic her right to occupy her office”, he added.
He went on to accuse the acting CJ of being conflicted stressing that, he has deliberately refused to empanel judges to hear the case brought before the apex court by the former CJ. “Yet this House should bless you with the benefit of vetting.”
The leader of the Minority side called on his counterpart to withdraw the aspect of the Committee’s report that said there was going to be vetting arguing forcefully that “We will not support Business Committee report that has an aspect that says that there is going to be vetting.”
On his second argument, he cited an instance where the Majority Leader raised objection to an issue that was before the court and the Minority had tried to have it tackled by the House and Mahama Ayariga objected. Using that as basis, Afenyo-Markin argued that, as was said and Speaker Alban Bagbin agreed, the same should be done in this instance and hold on until the court had concluded it work.
But the Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga refused to see reasons with his opponent, insisting there is nothing wrong to proceed with the vetting while the process continues at the courts.
“I once again drew your attention to the fact that the same Supreme Court has said that matters that are primarily the responsibility of Parliament, once Parliament starts dealing with those matters, no one anywhere can stop Parliament from dealing with those matters until Parliament has completed the process of that matter.”
He allayed fears saying in the event that there is a new twist after the courts give their judgement, the judiciary will prescribe its own remedies to cure any challenge that may arise.
On the ruling by the ECOWAS court, Mahama Ayariga said as a member of that court for almost a decade, he knows that, that the court is big on aggrieved persons exhausting processes in their countries before approaching them.
In the end, even though he the minority side argued their case out, Mahama Ayariga and the Majority side insisted and had their way.
While acknowledging the Minority Leader’s position on the removal of the former CJ, he emphasized that “The Constitution is very clear on these matters and the nomination of the Chief Justice is properly before this house, it has been referred to the Committee and the Committee will sit on Monday. I urge him to appear before the Committee as a member you can ask all your questions the nominee is willing able to answer all your questions put to him. If at the end of the day there is any decision by any court of thos country, I am sure the court will find a way of crafting a mechanism for enforcing their decision”.
By Gifty Boateng