Lawyer and Member of the NDC communications team, Hamza Sayibu Suhuyini, has said the ongoing process for the possible removal of the Chief Justice is well within the bounds of the law and should not be described as unconstitutional.

Speaking on JoyNews' AM Show on Wednesday, May 28, about the controversy surrounding the Chief Justice’s suspension and related court actions, Mr Suhuyini stressed that the matter is clearly a constitutional one.

“For many of us, we are yet to be convinced that what the Chief Justice is going through is an act that can be termed confidently as unconstitutional or a breach of the laws of Ghana,” he said.

According to him, the arguments being made by some legal minds that the process is unfair have not been fully persuasive. “I have read through many of the epistles written by celebrated lawyers of this country, and I am yet to come to terms with the fact that they strongly canvass that the processes are unfair. I am yet to come to that conclusion,” he noted.

He insisted that the steps being followed are outlined in the constitution and have not been challenged. “The woman is being taken through a constitutional process. The constitutional process has not been questioned,” he explained.

Mr Suhuyini also pushed back on claims that President John Mahama’s actions are undermining the constitution. “If you are now seeking to say because President Mahama, in consultation with the Council of State, acting in a way committed to the spirit and letter of Article 146 of our Constitution, is engaged in an act undermining that very Constitution, the onus is on you to demonstrate same,” he said.

Touching on the Chief Justice’s legal challenge before the Supreme Court, Suhuyini questioned the choice of forum.

“When I was looking at the application of the CJ suspended, I asked myself whether there is a need for us actually to even entertain the possibility of questioning the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in the matter,” he stated.

He argued that if the matter is about fundamental human rights, then it belongs in a different court. “Substantively, she is talking about her fundamental human right, and we all know that under our Constitution, when it comes to issues of human rights, the appropriate forum is the High Court,” he explained.

Suhuyini then urged a broader legal conversation on the issue, saying, “I think that we need to expand the engagement to include that ambit of the law, whether indeed what she has before the Supreme Court constitutes a matter calling for interpretation,” he said.