The Ghana Bar Association’s measured stance on Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo’s suspension has drawn unexpected political scrutiny, with government spokesperson Felix Kwakye Ofosu suggesting the legal body has abandoned its perceived anti-NDC bias.
In social media remarks that have fueled the already heated constitutional debate, Ofosu Kwakye characterized the GBA’s April 24 statement as surprisingly balanced compared to what he claims was historical hostility toward previous NDC administrations.
The minister’s intervention reveals the deepening political undercurrents surrounding the judicial crisis, even as he conceded that critics have failed to identify specific constitutional violations in President Akufo-Addo’s application of Article 146 procedures. His comments appear designed to frame the GBA’s constitutionalist position as an implicit endorsement of government actions, while simultaneously questioning the association’s consistency.
Legal observers note the irony in this political gambit – while the GBA carefully avoided partisan alignment by focusing strictly on procedural adherence, its neutrality itself has become politicized. The association’s emphasis on good faith application of constitutional provisions now finds itself caught between competing narratives, with government allies interpreting it as validation and opponents viewing it as necessary judicial oversight.
This development underscores how Ghana’s separation of powers doctrine faces stress tests during high-stakes constitutional moments. As the suspended Chief Justice awaits the committee’s determination, the GBA’s attempt to steer discourse toward legal principles rather than political loyalties appears increasingly challenging in the polarized pre-election climate.
The spokesperson’s remarks may ultimately achieve their apparent objective – shifting public attention from the substantive constitutional questions to meta-debates about institutional credibility and historical biases.