Removal probe: Adu Lodge trial venue reopens old wounds, says CJ Torkornoo

The choice of Adu Lodge, a high-security facility in Osu, as the venue for the ongoing removal proceedings against Ghana’s suspended Chief Justice, Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, has come under intense scrutiny after the top judge broke her silence, citing intimidation and constitutional breaches.

At a press conference on Wednesday (25 June), Justice Torkornoo described the venue as “intimidating” and “symbolically disturbing,” recalling its links to the 1981 abduction and murder of three High Court judges and a military officer, one of whom, Major Sam Acquah, was her uncle and guardian.

“That location played a key role in the planning of the June 30th, 1981, murder of judges. One of those murdered, Major Sam Acquah, had raised me. I continue to hold the view that there is no reason to hold a quasi-judicial hearing behind the high walls of Adu Lodge,” she said.

The Chief Justice further accused the Article 146 committee investigating her of breaching fundamental legal procedures, particularly rules of disclosure, in the ongoing proceedings being held at Adu Lodge in Osu.

In a public statement issued this week, Justice Torkornoo expressed deep concern over what she described as the committee’s refusal to provide her with essential documents relating to the petition for her removal — including the very complaints and responses forming the basis of the inquiry.

She argued that the committee has disregarded basic procedural rules that underpin all judicial and administrative hearings in the country, from the district courts to the Supreme Court.

“No citizen in this country can be summoned without being given a Writ of Summons, a Petition or Complaint,” she said.

“It is also the duty of every court, committee or tribunal to give anyone summoned before them copies of all documents that have been filed with them.”

Justice Torkornoo said the committee had declined to serve her with copies of the petitions submitted to the President — the very petitions that triggered the formation of the committee — as well as the responses she submitted in defence. According to her, the committee justified its refusal by claiming that she had already received the documents from the Presidency.

“They claim that they know the President sent me copies of the Petitions on 27th March 2025 and so, they do not need to show me their copies,” she said.

“They also claim to have copies of the Responses I gave to the President, but they will not provide the parties with copies of them.”