The dismissal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo has sparked a flurry of speculation and accusations, with the opposition alleging political machinations by the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC). However, Beatrice Annangfio, a presidential staffer, has vehemently denied these claims, asserting that the dismissal stemmed from long-standing legal disputes between the petitioner, prominent businessman Daniel Ofori, and Justice Torkornoo, predating the NDC’s return to power. Annangfio emphasized that the issue was rooted in a history of legal battles and not a politically motivated act by the current administration. She portrayed the situation as a personal vendetta pursued by Ofori, stemming from perceived bias against him in cases involving Ecobank.
Annangfio detailed the history of the conflict, highlighting Ofori’s status as a wealthy and frequent litigant. She explained that Ofori’s grievances originated from a series of legal encounters with Justice Torkornoo, dating back to her tenure as a High Court judge. This prolonged history of legal wrangling, according to Annangfio, laid the groundwork for the petition that ultimately led to Justice Torkornoo’s dismissal. The presidential staffer underscored the pre-existing nature of the conflict, arguing that it predated the NDC’s assumption of power and therefore could not be attributed to any political agenda on their part.
Central to the dispute was a legal battle between Ofori and Ecobank, which escalated through various judicial levels, from the High Court to the Supreme Court and even to a review stage. During these proceedings, Justice Torkornoo issued rulings against Ofori, solidifying his belief that she harbored bias against him in matters involving Ecobank. Ofori’s petition, according to Annangfio, was predicated on this perceived bias and the belief that Justice Torkornoo could not impartially preside over future cases involving the bank. This long-standing grievance, Annangfio insisted, formed the basis of the petition, not any political maneuvering by the NDC.
Annangfio’s account seeks to portray the dismissal as a consequence of a personal legal battle rather than a politically orchestrated removal. She stressed that the NDC’s recent ascension to power, a mere four months prior to the dismissal, negated the possibility of a premeditated plan to oust the Chief Justice. The timeline, according to Annangfio, simply didn’t support the accusations of political interference. She presented Ofori’s persistent pursuit of legal redress against Justice Torkornoo as the driving force behind the dismissal, emphasizing his pre-existing grievances as the primary catalyst.
The narrative offered by Annangfio aims to counter the prevailing narrative of political interference, positioning the dismissal as the culmination of a long-standing personal feud between Ofori and Justice Torkornoo. By highlighting the history of their legal disputes and Ofori’s persistent pursuit of the matter, she seeks to deflect accusations of political motivation on the part of the NDC. The timing of the dismissal, so soon after the NDC’s return to power, has fueled suspicions of political maneuvering, but Annangfio insists that this is a coincidence, and the dismissal is solely the result of Ofori’s long-standing legal grievances.
This explanation from within government circles represents a direct attempt to address the controversy surrounding Justice Torkornoo’s dismissal. Annangfio’s detailed recounting of the history between Ofori and the former Chief Justice aims to paint a picture of a personal conflict, not a politically driven act. Whether this explanation will quell the accusations of political interference remains to be seen, but it represents the strongest rebuttal yet from the government against the claims propagated by the opposition. The government’s narrative hinges on the pre-existing nature of the dispute and the insistence that the NDC had no hand in orchestrating Justice Torkornoo’s removal.
