The Human Rights Division of the High Court in Accra has dismissed a judicial review application filed by suspended Chief Justice Getrude Torkonoo.

The court, presided over by Justice Kwame Amoako, was of the view that the application constitutes an abuse of court process and that it lacks jurisdiction to consider it.

The review application marks the failure of the Chief Justice's second attempt to challenge the ongoing proceedings regarding petitions filed for her removal from office under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.

This latest judicial review follows an earlier constitutional interpretation case that the Chief Justice filed at the Supreme Court.

Additionally, her request for an injunction to stop the impeachment process was previously denied.

The review application was submitted on June 9, 2025, and sought nine specific reliefs, including declarations that the committee investigating her actions was operating unlawfully.

She requested the court to annul the committee's proceedings and prevent it from continuing without first providing authenticated copies of the petitions and responses against her.

The ruling by Justice Amoako categorised the reliefs sought by the Chief Justice into two main groups: those dismissed as an abuse of court process and those rejected due to lack of jurisdiction.

Claims dismissed as abuse of the court process

The court found that several of the Chief Justice's claims were already being addressed by the Supreme Court in her constitutional interpretation case.

The claims included:

• Allegations of unlawful committee proceedings due to the Registry's failure to provide authenticated petitions and responses.
• A request to stop the committee from continuing without those authenticated documents.
• Claims that the committee was conducting adversarial proceedings rather than impartial enquiries.
• Allegations regarding the unlawful composition of the committee.

Justice Amoako firmly stated that revisiting these issues in the High Court, while they are actively under consideration by the Supreme Court, constitutes duplicative litigation and an abuse of the judicial process.

Claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

The other reliefs were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, which included:

• Requests to nullify the committee's sittings on the basis that Torkonoo was denied a fair hearing.
• Allegations that her legal team was barred from representing her during the proceedings.
• Claims of procedural breaches of the Constitution and the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules.
• An application for an order of certiorari to quash the committee's proceedings.

The court maintained that it could not investigate these matters, as they pertain directly to the Article 146 committee's proceedings, which, per Article 146(8) of the Constitution, are to be held in-camera and shielded from external review.