Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo has launched a blistering critique of the ongoing Article 146 proceedings aimed at her removal from office, likening the treatment of her legal team to that of biblical magicians asked to reveal and interpret Nebuchadnezzar’s dream he had yet to disclose.

Delivering a national address on Wednesday, June 25, the embattled Chief Justice described the removal process as unconstitutional, opaque, and deeply flawed — particularly in its treatment of her legal counsel, whom she said have been forced to operate blindly.

“Like Nebuchadnezzar’s situation in which he demanded that the magicians in his court should tell him his dream and also interpret it, my lawyers are left to guess which allegations in the petitions are the subject matter of the testimonies being given,” Justice Torkornoo said.

According to her, since the proceedings began on May 23, her legal team has not been served with the actual petitions submitted to the President or any clear statement of charges, yet they are expected to cross-examine witnesses and mount a defence.

The Chief Justice stated that the committee has “refused and/or failed” to give her the foundational documents of the case, including the original petitions, responses she submitted to the President, or the President’s prima facie determination. She said this violates basic tenets of fair hearing.

“No citizen in this country can be summoned without being given a writ of summons, petition, or complaint,” she said. “But that is exactly what is happening here.”

She added that the committee, despite lacking the legal status of a court or a statutory commission, has allowed petitioners to issue subpoenas to public officials and present evidence without ever taking the stand themselves.

“The petitioners are not testifying, they are not being cross-examined, but they are allowed to issue subpoenas. This is not law. This is something else,” the Chief Justice declared.

Justice Torkornoo criticised the committee’s rejection of established inquiry procedures under C.I. 65 in favour of litigation-style rules under C.I. 47, despite the fact that no pleadings or agreed issues have been set out.

She noted that this irregular approach, combined with the secrecy of proceedings and high-security setting at Adu Lodge — a site she linked to the 1981 murder of judges — suggested an intent to intimidate and silence.

“The proceedings are not just irregular, they are unprecedented,” she said. “This is a model of injustice I would never have thought possible had I not experienced it.”

Her remarks come amid rising concern among legal and civil society groups about the implications of her treatment on judicial independence. By highlighting the conditions under which her lawyers are operating, the Chief Justice raised alarm that the process does not only threaten her office, but the broader rule of law.

She confirmed that her legal team has filed for judicial review at the High Court, seeking to void the proceedings entirely.

“This total absence of compliance with all known rules of fair hearing cannot stand,” she insisted. “It is not just about me. It is about the future of every judge and every public official protected by the Constitution.”