CJ suspension: Would there have been 3-2 result if panel wasn't reconstituted? - Atuguba asks

Retired Supreme Court Justice William Atuguba has defended the Supreme Court panel. This panel recently delivered a 3-2 ruling involving suspended Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo.

Justice Atuguba believes the outcome could have been different if the panel had not changed. He shared his views in an exclusive interview with JoyNews’ Elton Brobbey.

He questioned the New Patriotic Party's (NPP) sincerity regarding the Chief Justice’s suspension. He dismissed Godfred Dame’s objection to the acting Chief Justice presiding over the case as unfounded.

“Look at the empanelment,” he said. “If that panel had not been reconstituted, do you think we would have seen a 3–2 decision?”

He noted that there had been many unanimous decisions favoring one side until now. This raised suspicions about political bias in the judiciary during Chief Justice Torkornoo’s tenure.

“What is the impression there?” he asked. “So long as Justice Torkornoo puts panels that give you unanimous decisions, that is justice, isn't it?”

He criticized the NPP for promoting a one-sided democratic structure. “That’s rubbish,” he said. “You are ordaining a dictatorship in disguise.”

Justice Atuguba referenced National Security Minister Albert Kan-Dapaah's comments on court decisions balancing national stability. He called Kan-Dapaah “an honest man” but questioned his implications.

“If courts are truly implementing law, why would he say that?” he asked. “What was making him apprehensive? Public perception? The trend of unanimous rulings?”

He also criticized the NPP’s moral authority to question current judicial processes. “When they were in office, did they act transparently? Neutrally? In the interest of people?”

“I hate this kind of pure hypocrisy,” he concluded.