The ECOWAS Court of Justice has dismissed former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo’s application seeking interim measures to halt the work of the committee that investigated her removal from office.

Deputy Attorney General Justice Srem Sai, who shared the court’s ruling on Facebook, said the application “did not satisfy the criteria for a grant of interim measures.”

“The Applicant’s own conduct defeats her claim of imminent and irreparable harm. The Court is, therefore, satisfied that the Applicant has not demonstrated the existence of an imminent or exceptional circumstance that will justify the urgency of the application filed almost three months after the act complained of,” Justice Sai posted.

The court ruling, delivered on Wednesday, November 19, 2025, via Zoom comes after Justice Torkornoo applied for temporary prohibition orders to stop the committee, chaired by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, from continuing its inquiry into matters that eventually led to her removal and the swearing-in of her successor, Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie.

While the ECOWAS Court acknowledged that the former Chief Justice had established a prima facie case alleging human rights violations, it ruled that she failed to demonstrate the urgency required for temporary orders. The judges noted that she waited nearly three months after her suspension on April 22, 2025, before filing the motion—a delay that undermined her claim of imminent harm.

In addition, the Court rejected a preliminary objection from the Government of Ghana, which argued that it lacked jurisdiction because related issues were before Ghanaian courts.

The judges described the objection as “misplaced,” clarifying that the sub judice principle applies only when a matter is awaiting judgment elsewhere, not merely because cases share similar facts.

To this end, the ECOWAS court has ordered Ghana to file its response to the application filed by Justice Gertrude Torkornoo within the next 30 days since the nation refused to file the same using their application challenging the jurisdiction of the court as the basis for the refusal to respond to the pending application of Justice Torkornoo.

The Deputy Attorney General, during the hearing, also wanted the court to order lawyers representing Justice Torkornoo to withdraw an application they filed for a default ruling of the court following the refusal of Ghana to respond to the substantive action before the court. However, Justice Torkornoo’s lawyers indicated that they will not withdraw the same because they believe that Ghana will not respond to the application if they withdraw their application for a default ruling.