NPP’s Director of Legal Affairs, Frank Davies, has criticised the ongoing process to remove the Chief Justice, describing it as politically motivated and a veiled attack on the judiciary.

Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express on Tuesday, April 22, he said the situation unfolding under President John Mahama’s administration is deeply troubling and sets a dangerous precedent for the country’s democracy.

“Well, as a trained lawyer, I would rather have wished that we are not where we are now,” he said.

“This, obviously, is the first in our democratic dispensation that the Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo has had to be suspended on petitions for her removal.”

Frank Davies acknowledged that the process is legal, citing Article 146 of the Constitution.

But he insisted that the motives behind the move are suspect and appear to go beyond the legal framework.

“I am not saying it’s not due process,” he explained.

“Of course, Article 146 is a constitutional stricture. So nobody can say that what is happening is not regulated by the Constitution. It is a baby of the Constitution.”

Yet he warned that the broader picture cannot be ignored.

“The reason why I say it’s an assault on the judiciary is that we should look at the commentary that has gone on so far and the kind of statements which have been made by very senior political actors,” he said.

“It gives a veiled impression that maybe this Chief Justice is not liked, so there should be an attempt to have her removed.”

He argued that public discourse and political rhetoric surrounding the petitions suggest an undercurrent of personal dislike rather than legitimate constitutional concerns.

The committee, formed by President Mahama to investigate the petitions, is made up of respected figures from the legal, academic, public service, and military sectors.

It has been tasked with a full inquiry into the allegations.

But Davies believes the formation of the committee and its swift commencement could further erode confidence in the independence of the judiciary.

“We have to ask ourselves,” he said. “Are we upholding the spirit of the Constitution, or are we weaponising it for political ends?”

Frank Davies concluded with a stern warning: “If the highest judicial office in the land can be subjected to this kind of manoeuvring, then we all have to worry. Today it’s the Chief Justice. Tomorrow, who knows?”