Former Attorney General and diplomat, Ayikoi Otoo, has argued that the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo represents a fundamental misplacement of responsibility within the judicial system.
Speaking on PM Express on Joy News on Monday, September 1, Mr. Otoo said the Chief Justice was being punished for actions that fell under the authority of administrative officers, not her personal discretion.
He noted that entitlements for official travel, including per diems and related allowances, are processed entirely by the Judicial Service bureaucracy and not determined by the officeholder.
“When these entitlements come, it is not for you to determine anything. You only indicate your intention to travel, and the officers calculate what is due and bring it to you. This is standard practice for all senior public officers,” he explained.
According to him, the Judicial Service has a travel policy that expressly allows the Chief Justice to travel with a companion of their choice, a fact that was ignored by the committee that investigated the matter.
Mr. Otoo emphasised that if there had been errors in the calculation or allocation of travel benefits, the issue should have been flagged in an audit, not treated as misconduct.
“If something was wrongly given, it is for auditors to recommend a surcharge. It cannot be a ground for removal,” he stressed.
He further clarified that accountability for expenditure lies with the Judicial Secretary, who is the official spending officer. Yet, he lamented, the committee placed liability on the Chief Justice instead of the responsible administrators.
“Management letters on expenditure were sent to the Judicial Secretary, not the Chief Justice. So why was she held responsible for what she did not authorise?” he asked.
Expressing disappointment with the committee’s recommendation, Mr. Otoo said he was shocked by the involvement of Daniel Domelevo, a respected anti-corruption advocate, in endorsing what he described as a mischaracterisation of policy compliance as financial misconduct.
He concluded that Justice Torkornoo’s removal was unjust, amounting to punishing her for adhering to institutional procedures rather than breaching them.Ayikoi Otoo: Judiciary’s Administrative Failures Wrongly Blamed on Former Chief Justice
Former Attorney General and diplomat, Ayikoi Otoo, has argued that the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo represents a fundamental misplacement of responsibility within the judicial system.
Speaking on PM Express on Joy News on Monday, September 1, Mr. Otoo said the Chief Justice was being punished for actions that fell under the authority of administrative officers, not her personal discretion.
He noted that entitlements for official travel, including per diems and related allowances, are processed entirely by the Judicial Service bureaucracy and not determined by the officeholder.
“When these entitlements come, it is not for you to determine anything. You only indicate your intention to travel, and the officers calculate what is due and bring it to you. This is standard practice for all senior public officers,” he explained.
According to him, the Judicial Service has a travel policy that expressly allows the Chief Justice to travel with a companion of their choice, a fact that was ignored by the committee that investigated the matter.
Mr. Otoo emphasised that if there had been errors in the calculation or allocation of travel benefits, the issue should have been flagged in an audit, not treated as misconduct.
“If something was wrongly given, it is for auditors to recommend a surcharge. It cannot be a ground for removal,” he stressed.
He further clarified that accountability for expenditure lies with the Judicial Secretary, who is the official spending officer. Yet, he lamented, the committee placed liability on the Chief Justice instead of the responsible administrators.
“Management letters on expenditure were sent to the Judicial Secretary, not the Chief Justice. So why was she held responsible for what she did not authorise?” he asked.
Expressing disappointment with the committee’s recommendation, Mr. Otoo said he was shocked by the involvement of Daniel Domelevo, a respected anti-corruption advocate, in endorsing what he described as a mischaracterisation of policy compliance as financial misconduct.
He concluded that Justice Torkornoo’s removal was unjust, amounting to punishing her for adhering to institutional procedures rather than breaching them.
