Former Director of the Ghana School of Law, Kwaku Ansa-Asare, has backed the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision to strike out a supplementary affidavit filed by the suspended Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo, in her bid to challenge proceedings related to her possible removal from office.

Speaking on JoyNews’ The Pulse on Wednesday, Mr Ansa-Asare explained that the rejection was procedurally justified, noting that a supplementary affidavit cannot be introduced without the court’s prior approval.

"The basis for throwing out the supplementary affidavit is simply the fact that when you bring an application for an interlocutory injunction, the court decides the application based on the main affidavit deposed to support your motion," he said.

• Read also: Supreme Court unanimously strikes out suspended CJ’s supplementary affidavit

"Before you can rely on a supplementary affidavit, you must obtain prior leave of the court. If you file it without permission, it will be thrown out because it’s not allowed."

The Supreme Court’s ruling came after the Chief Justice filed a damning supplementary affidavit at the Supreme Court, painting a harrowing picture of her treatment in the ongoing impeachment inquiry, which she describes as "a mockery of justice, an assault on judicial independence, and worse than the treatment meted out to persons accused of treason."

Justice Torkornoo said the process she’s being subjected to constitutes “a complete desecration of my basic constitutional rights to a fair trial, violation of my dignity and subjection to inhuman and degrading treatment, of a kind not meted out to even accused persons on trial for treason.”

In response, she filed a supplementary affidavit to challenge the legality of aspects of the process.

• Read also: Suspended CJ’s injunction application unanimously dismissed by Supreme Court

However, the Court ruled that the contents of the supplementary affidavit disclosed information that should remain confidential and be handled strictly in camera, in accordance with Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.

The five-member panel upheld on Wednesday, May 28, the application filed by the Deputy Attorney General, Justice Srem Sai, finding merit in the argument that the affidavit breached the confidentiality of the committee’s proceedings.

Mr. Ansa-Asare stated that this discretion lies entirely with the court and that the Chief Justice’s legal team should have sought formal permission before attempting to introduce additional material.

"So it is an exercise of discretion, whether a supplementary affidavit will be allowed or not."