Legal practitioner and human rights advocate Madam Asonaba Dapaah has challenged the government’s insistence on confidentiality in the ongoing impeachment proceedings against the suspended Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo.

Her remarks follow recent statements by Minister for Government Communications Felix Kwakye Ofosu, who argued that proceedings under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution must be held in camera.

Speaking in an interview on Channel One TV, Madam Dapaah firmly rejected the notion that Article 146 supersedes the fundamental rights provisions enshrined in Chapter 5 of the Constitution.

She criticised the government’s interpretation as overly narrow and dismissive of broader constitutional obligations.

“In all good faith, if you want to address some of these issues, the response should not be left to go, to say that absolutely, without looking at the fact as indicated,” she said.

She insisted that the confidentiality clause under Article 146 should not be treated as superior to a citizen’s right to a fair hearing and due process.

“The in-camera provision under Article 146 is not superior to Chapter 5 of the fundamental human rights,” Madam Dapaah emphasised.

“You cannot be submissive to these allegations under the guise of in-camera proceedings and then purport to say that Article 146’s requirement of in-camera provision is superior to any allegations of fundamental human rights.”

Describing the government’s posture as “regrettable”, Madam Dapaah condemned what she referred to as a “very dismissive” approach to transparency.

She urged a more balanced reading of the Constitution that respects both procedural integrity and the public’s right to know.

According to her, the attempt to sideline these rights raises questions about the credibility and fairness of the ongoing process.

Her intervention adds to a growing national debate over the handling of the Chief Justice’s impeachment.

Justice Torkornoo, who broke her silence yesterday, revealed that she had received threats intended to pressure her into resigning and defended her appeal for a public hearing as essential to ensuring both transparency and fairness in the proceedings.