Martin Amidu has taken aim at former Chief Justice and current Council of State member Sophia Akuffo, accusing her of breaching her oath by publicly criticizing the constitutional process used to suspend and investigate sitting Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo.
Responding to remarks Akuffo made at the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC) forum on April 30 — in which she described Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution as “unfair” and called for amendments to allow a right of appeal for a Chief Justice found guilty by a committee — Amidu questioned the legality and ethics of such commentary from someone directly involved in the consultative process.
“A member of the Council of State has no legal, ethical, or moral authority to mount a public platform to discuss the constitutionality of a provision in respect of which the Council was consulted and acted,” Amidu said. “Ms. Akuffo’s conduct is a clear breach of her oath as a Council of State member and sends the wrong message to the public.”
Amidu referenced a panel discussion on Asempa FM’s Ekosiisen programme, where former MP Andrew Egyapa Mercer reportedly stated: “God bless former Chief Justice Sophia Akufo for abstaining from the removal process of Justice Torkonoo; I however expect her to make the reasons public.” Amidu believes Akuffo’s comments at the CRC forum were in direct response to this call.
“It appears she used the CRC as a platform to justify her abstention during the Council’s vote,” he argued. “But in doing so, she’s compromised the confidentiality of the process and undermined the work of the committee appointed by the President.”
He added that by openly criticising the fairness of Article 146, Akuffo indirectly discredited her colleagues on the Council of State who voted in favour of the inquiry. “Her comments create the impression that the petitions are unmeritorious and that the Council acted improperly in endorsing further action,” he said.
Amidu also pointed out a perceived double standard. “Why is she only advocating a right of appeal for a Chief Justice and not for other Superior Court Justices? The reason is not far-fetched. When she was Chief Justice, she saw nothing wrong in determining prima facie cases against Electoral Commissioners who were subsequently removed without a right of appeal. But today, she wants a different rule.”
He added, “She herself was petitioned for removal, and her cousin, President Akufo-Addo, refused to act on it. That was a clear violation of the Constitution, but she raised no concerns then.”
Citing a Supreme Court decision in Dery v. Tiger Eye PI & Others, Amidu emphasized that petitions under Article 146 must remain confidential. “The content of a petition to the President is not to be shared with the media or public before a prima facie determination is made,” he warned. “Yet here we are, with a Council of State member using a public forum to dissect a process she was part of behind closed doors.”
Amidu concluded by saying: “This kind of exceptionalism cannot be allowed to pass. It brings the work of the committee into disrepute and casts a shadow over a constitutional process that must remain impartial and confidential.”
