Prominent private legal practitioner, Justice Abdulai, has firmly dissociated himself from the Ghana Bar Association’s (GBA) resolution condemning the suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, labeling the group’s position as baseless and detached from Ghana’s constitutional realities.
Speaking during a panel discussion on The Big Issue aired on Channel One TV on Saturday, May 3, Justice Abdulai made it clear he did not support the controversial resolution passed by a section of the GBA, which urged the government to reverse the Chief Justice’s suspension on constitutional grounds.
“I was not part of the 47 members who voted for the resolution. I disagree entirely with every word of it,” Abdulai asserted, distancing himself not only from the decision but also from the rationale behind it.
Though acknowledging that, procedurally, he may be bound by the collective will of the association, Abdulai emphasized his personal and professional opposition to the resolution. “While it may appear binding due to the collective nature of the Bar, I will never defend or promote such a position. It’s fundamentally flawed,” he stressed.
He went on to criticise the GBA’s intervention as legally toothless, saying its resolution carries no practical influence over the executive or constitutional processes already in motion.
“I don’t see any legal merit in the arguments advanced by the GBA. Their resolution does not affect the legitimacy of the actions taken by the Council of State or the Executive,” he said.
In a broader reflection, Justice Abdulai used the moment to call for reforms within the GBA itself. He argued that the Association must evolve to remain relevant and responsive to the evolving legal and political landscape in Ghana.
“We must re-evaluate how we operate as a professional body. The Bar should be more constructive, more grounded in legal substance, and more impactful in national discourse,” he proposed.
His remarks come days after the GBA’s April 29 resolution described the Chief Justice’s suspension as unconstitutional and devoid of legal foundation—a position that has since triggered a wave of public debate, with some lawyers backing the Association and others, like Abdulai, openly challenging it.
