Suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo’s judicial review application at the High Court in Accra has been thrown out.

The Human Rights Division of the Accra High Court on Thursday, July 31, dismissed her application for judicial review, describing it as an "abuse of court processes" and further asserting that it lacked jurisdiction.

In a determination, the court presided over by Justice Kwame Amoako was of the opinion that the portions of the reliefs being sought by Justice Torkornoo against the Justice Pwamang Committee of Inquiry had already been determined by the Supreme Court, while the substantive case on the matter was still pending at the apex court.

It was also the court’s opinion that it was not clothed with the authority to interpret the Constitution in respect of the allegations the Chief Justice had made about how she had been handled by the inquiry committee since, according to the 1992 Constitution, the entire process should to be held in camera.

Relying on the case of CENCES versus Attorney-General (A-G), Dery versus Tiger Eye and AG, the court held that the High Court did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine issues for the said reliefs, and as such could not inquire into the in cameraproceedings.

Justice Amoako added that the court was bound by the decision of the Supreme Court on Article 146(8) of the 1992 Constitution, and thus the evidence of proceedings of the Justice Pwamang Committee could not be entertained by the court even in chambers as urged on it by the lawyer for the suspended CJ.

The reliefs that the court said were before the Supreme Court are the ones bordering on the registry of the committee failing to give her the authenticated copies of the petitions, prohibition of the committee from undertaking any proceedings, and the one seeking a deflation that the committee was not lawfully constituted.

Application

Justice Torkornoo, on June 9, 2025 filed an application at the High Court seeking a review of some of the decisions of the Justice Gabriel Pwamang-led Committee probing the three petitions calling for her removal.

She was of the opinion that the committee was arbitrary and unconstitutional.

The suspended CJ was of the view that since the registry of the committee failed to give the parties in the probe the authenticated copies of the three petitions and proceeding to hear the matter the entire process was arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable, and hence violated Articles 23 and 296 of the Constitution.

She was, therefore, asking the court to prohibit the committee from undertaking any proceedings, without its registry providing the parties with the authenticated copies of the petitions and responses forwarded by the President to the committee.

Justice Torkornoo also asked the court to declare the committee’s proceedings of May 15, 22, 23, 26 and 30, 2025 null and void for being in breach of Articles 23, 146, 280, 295 of the Constitution, as well as Order 2 Rule 2, Order 2 Rule 7, Order 7 Rule 3(1), Order 32 and Order 34 Rule 2(2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) rules.

However, the Attorney General filed an application asking the court to strike out the application for judicial review on grounds that all the matters raised in it had either been dealt with or currently pending before the Supreme Court.