As public debate intensifies over recent CCTV footage showing three superior court judges at Santoku Restaurant in Accra, legal analyst Kwame Adofo has dismissed allegations of judicial misconduct, asserting that the clips offer no basis for disciplinary action.
The footage—now widely circulated and tied to a petition by private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu seeking the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo—has prompted concerns over potential collusion or ethical lapses within the judiciary. Critics argue the restaurant encounter raises questions about judicial impartiality in ongoing legal matters.
But speaking on Asaase Radio’s Breakfast Show on Thursday, 23 May 2025, Adofo challenged the narrative, describing the visual evidence as insufficient and speculative.
“What I have seen is that three individuals entered a restaurant and exchanged brief greetings,” Adofo said. “That, by itself, cannot establish any form of judicial wrongdoing.”
He maintained that social interaction in a public space, including greetings or even hugs, does not violate the judicial code of conduct. According to Adofo, more concrete actions—such as sitting down with a litigant or engaging in a private meeting—would be required to trigger legitimate concerns of misconduct.
“If you saw them having a meeting or dining with a litigant, that would be another matter,” he added. “But from the footage alone, there’s no such evidence.”
The judges seen in the footage—Justices Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, Samuel Adibu-Asiedu, and Henry A. Kwofie—are not directly connected to the case involving Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, who is named in the removal petition. This, Adofo argued, further weakens claims of judicial compromise.
He also cautioned against drawing hasty conclusions from circumstantial visuals.
“Judges are also human and can be seen in public places. Unless there is evidence showing them engaging in a conversation that compromises their duty, there’s no legal breach,” he stressed.
As pressure mounts on Ghana’s judiciary in light of the viral footage, Adofo’s legal interpretation injects a note of caution—urging both the public and critics to distinguish between perception and provable impropriety.
