ECOWAS Court rejects Torkonoo’s request to stop probe committee

The ECOWAS Court of Justice has dismissed an application filed by former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo, which sought interim orders to suspend the operations of the committee that investigated her removal from office. In the same ruling, delivered on Wednesday, November 19, 2025, the Court also overruled a preliminary objection raised by the Government of Ghana, which had challenged the Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.


Justice Torkonoo’s application followed the establishment of a presidential committee chaired by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, tasked with probing the circumstances surrounding her removal and the subsequent swearing-in of Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie. While the Court acknowledged that the applicant had made a prima facie case alleging violations of her human rights, it concluded that she had not demonstrated sufficient urgency to warrant the issuance of temporary relief halting the committee’s proceedings.

The judges noted that despite being suspended on April 22, 2025, and fully aware of the ongoing processes, she waited three months before filing her motion—undermining her own claims of imminent or irreparable harm. As a result, the request for a prohibition order was dismissed.

The Court also addressed a separate objection by Ghana’s Attorney General, who argued that the matter was sub judice because related issues were before a Ghanaian court. The ECOWAS Court disagreed, describing the objection as “misplaced.”

According to the ruling, the application before the regional court concerns alleged violations of Justice Torkonoo’s human rights during the suspension and removal process, and does not seek to review or overturn any decision of a Ghanaian court. The judges further clarified that the sub judice principle applies only when a matter is awaiting judgment elsewhere—not merely because two cases share similar facts.

The Court concluded that it has jurisdiction to determine the substantive matter, having established the existence of a prima facie human rights claim. It therefore declared the main application admissible and directed the Attorney General to file a response.

Source: Hanson Agyemang

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here