VINCENT EKOW ASSAFUAH vs. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

This Supreme Court original-jurisdiction ruling concerns an application by a citizen to restrain President John Mahama and the Council of State from continuing the Article 146 process to remove Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo and to suspend the warrant of her suspension. The Applicant alleged that the President initiated consultations with the Council of State to determine prima facie before notifying the Chief Justice or seeking her comments, thereby violating Articles 146, 23 and 296, and undermining judicial independence. The majority, per Amadu JSC, found that Exhibit B (28 March letter from the Presidency) showed the President’s initial step was to seek the Chief Justice’s preliminary comments; the Chief Justice was notified and responded, and her responses were transmitted to the Council of State before the prima facie determination. Applying Welford Quarcoo, the Court held the Applicant failed to establish a serious question, irreparable harm, or that the balance of convenience favored an injunction, and further failed to meet the exceptional-circumstances test for suspending the warrant under Article 146(10). Kulendi JSC concurred, emphasizing separation of powers, presumption of regularity, and that mere service of an injunction application does not halt executive action without an express order. Prof. Mensa-Bonsu JSC dissented, stressing that fair hearing must precede transmission of petitions and urging an injunction to safeguard judicial independence.