Suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo has vehemently defended her unblemished reputation in light of ongoing inquiries, declaring that throughout her distinguished career spanning roles as lawyer, judge, and Chief Justice, no one can justifiably accuse her of accepting a bribe to decide a case.

“I am confident that in my journey as a lawyer, judge and now Chief Justice, there is no one person who can look at me in the eye and accuse me of taking a bribe to decide a case. This is the personal treasure of integrity that I live with,” she declared, her first since suspension.

Justice Torkornoo’s comments come in the wake of her historic suspension on April 25, 2025, when President John Mahama acting on three separate petitions alleging misconduct determined, after consulting the Council of State, that there was a prima facie case for removal.

A five-member committee, chaired by Justice Gabriel Pwamang, was subsequently appointed to investigate the allegations.

Justice Torkornoo argues that the disciplinary process may have been deliberately orchestrated to force her out, regardless of the absence of legitimate grounds.

“So what if these current proceedings are being carefully staged to result in my removal as Chief Justice – even if there is no lawful justification? All I have stated shows that any such action would have been done on the basis of lies and violations of law and due process.”

She drew attention to her distinguished record spanning appointments under four presidents, and service across the High Court, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court maintaining she never anticipated such procedural deficiencies until personally confronted by them.

“As a career Judge… I could never have imagined such irregularities possible if I had not personally encountered it,” she said.

Justice Torkornoo closed with a heartfelt appeal, reflecting on her roles beyond the judiciary “a mother, and a grandmother” and emphasised her hopes for Ghana’s democratic and legal institutions.

“I am also a mother, and a grandmother who must hope for better than this for our nation, its rule of law and democracy.”

Her suspension ignited fervent debate across the country. The Centre for Citizenship, Constitutional and Electoral Systems (CenCES) filed a legal challenge, describing the suspension procedure as constitutionally flawed and lacking due process.

The Supreme Court, however, upheld the President’s authority to suspend her, dismissing CenCES’s application in a 4–1 majority ruling. Other attempts by the accused herself to legally block the proceedings also failed.

Critics, including the Minority Caucus in Parliament and opposition figures, have condemned the suspension as a politically motivated attack on judicial independence.