ECOWAS Court dismisses Justice Torkonoo’s case to halt removal committee

The ECOWAS Court of Justice has rejected an application by former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo seeking temporary orders to halt the work of a presidential committee that investigated the processes leading to her removal from office.

The regional court, sitting on Wednesday, 19 November 2025, also dismissed a preliminary objection raised by the Government of Ghana, which had argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

Justice Torkonoo’s application sought to restrain the committee—chaired by Supreme Court Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang—from continuing its work pending the determination of her suit alleging violations of her human rights in the suspension and removal process that culminated in the appointment of her successor, Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie.

The judges held that while the former Chief Justice had established a prima facie claim of potential rights violations, she failed to satisfy the Court’s threshold for urgency.

They noted that she was suspended on 22 April 2025, was aware of the ongoing inquiry, yet waited three months before filing the motion. This delay, they ruled, undermined assertions of imminent or irreparable harm.

The request for provisional measures was therefore dismissed.

The Court also addressed Ghana’s claim that the matter was sub judice, given parallel proceedings before a domestic court. The ECOWAS judges rejected the argument, describing it as “misplaced.”

They held that the application before them concerned alleged human rights violations arising from the disciplinary and removal process—not a review of any decision of a Ghanaian court. The sub judice rule, they added, applies only when a tribunal is asked to adjudicate an issue awaiting judgment elsewhere, not merely when two cases share similar factual backgrounds.

Having found that the application meets admissibility requirements and raises legitimate human-rights questions, the ECOWAS Court affirmed its jurisdiction to hear the substantive matter.

It subsequently directed Ghana’s Attorney General to file a formal response as the proceedings move to the merits.