Private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu says Ghana’s constitutional framework for handling judicial misconduct is dangerously vague and risks undermining judicial stability, as highlighted by the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo.
Speaking on Channel One TV on Monday, September 1, Mr. Kpebu argued that the lack of distinction between minor infractions and serious offences creates room for abuse and disproportionate sanctions.
“One of the things we must do is categorise misconduct — to distinguish between serious offences and minor ones. Without such categorisation, there is the danger that trivial issues may be treated with the same severity as grave breaches, leading to disproportionate consequences such as removal from office,” he explained.
He described Justice Torkornoo’s dismissal as a wake-up call for urgent reforms to protect judicial officers from arbitrary or politically motivated decisions.
While reiterating earlier concerns about presidential influence in the appointment of Chief Justices under Article 144 of the 1992 Constitution, Mr. Kpebu placed equal weight on the need for a transparent, well-defined disciplinary system.
According to him, Ghana must develop a framework that ensures accountability without weaponising discipline against judges.
“Judicial officers must answer for wrongdoing, yes, but the process must be clear, fair and proportional. Otherwise, judicial independence suffers, and public trust in the rule of law erodes,” he warned.
Mr. Kpebu’s remarks underscore growing concerns that the current system leaves the judiciary vulnerable — not only at the point of appointment but also throughout the tenure of its top officers.
