Kwaku Ansa-Asare (L) and the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkonoo
Former Director of the Ghana School of Law, Kwaku Ansa-Asare, has opined that he would not have petitioned President John Dramani Mahama for copies of the petitions seeking her removal if he was in her (Chief Justice) shoes.
He said the Chief Justice’s quest to seek the petition is proof of her profound knowledge of the law and the processes.
Speaking on Adom FM’s Dwaso Nsem on Thursday, March 28, Ansa-Asare said that while the CJ is within her rights to seek the documents, he would not have made such a move.
“If I were the Chief Justice, I wouldn’t have even asked for the copies. But the fact that she has requested them shows that she knows the law and understands that she is entitled to them,” he said.
He explained that the law requires a Chief Justice to be informed of any petition filed against them.
“The law is clear. If a petition is sent against the Chief Justice, she must know what it says. That’s why she wrote to the president requesting her copies.”
However, he argued that the Chief Justice did not necessarily need to make a formal request.
“She should have just continued with her work. The Council of State will ask if she has been given copies, and if not, they will direct the president to provide them,” he added.
According to Ansa-Asare, proceeding with the petition without allowing the Chief Justice to respond would be improper.
“A petition without the response of the person it is against is incomplete. How do you decide without hearing from the other side?” he questioned.
His comments come after Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo formally requested copies of the three petitions submitted to President John Mahama seeking her removal.
In a letter to the President on Thursday, March 27, she stated, “I am by this letter humbly and respectfully asking His Excellency the President and eminent members of the Council of State to forward the petitions against me and allow me at least seven days after receipt to provide my response, which can then form part of the material for the consultations anticipated under Article 146(6), before the possible setting up of a Committee of Inquiry under Article 146(7).”
VA/EK
Meanwhile, watch as Adum traders hoot at interior minister, reject 1,500 bags of rice, boxes of cooking oil