AG hasn’t filed statement of case in Torkonoo’s go well with – Essuman – Life Pulse Daily

Introduction

The ongoing legal dispute involving Ghana’s Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkonoo, has taken a pivotal turn as legal expert Kow Essuman has raised serious concerns over the Attorney General’s (AG) failure to submit a statement of case in the Supreme Court proceedings. This development has sparked debates about judicial fairness, procedural delays, and constitutional accountability. Essuman, a prominent legal counsel, has condemned the AG’s inaction as “extremely unfair and unconstitutional,” arguing that the absence of formal charges undermines the integrity of Ghana’s judicial system. This article delves into the complexities of the case, analyzes its implications, and highlights why this issue demands urgent attention from legal and constitutional watchdogs.

Analysis of the Legal Dispute

Background of the Case

Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo initiated legal action against the government after alleged violations of her constitutional rights. Her legal team sought injunctive relief to halt what she deemed unconstitutional actions by executive authorities. However, the Supreme Court denied the injunction, opting instead to resolve the substantive issues of the case before ejecting any procedural recourse. Despite the case being pending for months, the AG, as the defendant, has yet to respond formally.

Constitutional and Procedural Concerns

Essuman emphasized that the AG’s inaction contravenes procedural norms in Ghana’s legal system. Under Ghana’s Constitution, the Attorney General is obligated to defend the state in litigation matters. His failure to file a statement of case suggests either a deliberate evasion of responsibility or systemic inefficiencies within the legal framework. This omission risks setting a dangerous precedent where state entities can delay justice by withholding critical documents, thereby prolonging legal battles indefinitely.

Impact on Judicial Independence

The AG’s refusal to engage with the Supreme Court process threatens the independence of the judiciary. Without the defendant’s participation, the court cannot render an informed judgment, leaving the case in legal limbo. Essuman warned that this delay could erode public trust in judicial institutions, particularly if the case involves high-profile figures like the Chief Justice. “When the person tasked with defending the state fails to act, it creates an imbalance where the plaintiff holds disproportionate power,” he noted.

Summary of Key Developments

The case centers on allegations of constitutional violations against Chief Justice Torkonoo, which she addressed by filing a complaint with the Supreme Court. Despite her efforts, the AG’s office has not submitted its defense, causing significant delays. Essuman has publicly criticized this inaction, framing it as a breach of legal ethics and constitutional obligations. The situation highlights tensions between the executive and judicial branches, raising questions about accountability in Ghana’s governance structure.

Key Points to Consider

• AG’s Legal Obligations: The Attorney General is constitutionally mandated to represent the state in all judicial proceedings.
• Constitutional Rights at Stake: Torkonoo’s case involves claims of infringements on her personal and professional rights as per Article 12 of the 1992 Constitution.
• Procedural Delays: The absence of a defense statement from the AG has stalled case progression, with no timeline for resolution.
• Public Interest Implications: Delays risk undermining judicial credibility and public confidence in Ghana’s legal system.

Practical Advice for Legal Stakeholders

Ensuring Transparency in Judicial Proceedings

To mitigate future risks, legal practitioners and constitutional experts advocate for stricter oversight of the AG’s office. Key recommendations include:

1. Regular audits of the AG’s compliance with procedural deadlines.
2. Establishing an independent monitoring body to oversee high-profile cases.
3. Amending constitutional provisions to penalize deliberate procedural non-compliance.

Leveraging Legal Recourse

Individuals accused of constitutional violations should promptly engage experienced legal teams to navigate complex litigation processes. Victims of state negligence, as seen in Torkonoo’s case, may also file supplementary motions to expedite rulings, ensuring their grievances are addressed without undue delay.

Points of Caution

Consequences of Procedural Non-Compliance

Ignoring formal legal steps, such as filing a statement of case, could result in default judgments against the state. While this support against the AG is currently speculative, Essuman stressed that prolonged delays could invite scrutiny from Ghana’s Anti-Corruption and Tobacco Control Commission (ACTCC) or the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ).

Balancing State and Individual Rights

The case underscores the delicate equilibrium between protecting state interests and upholding individual rights. Overemphasis on one at the expense of the other risks constitutional imbalance. Experts urge the court to prioritize expeditious resolution to prevent erosion of either pillar.

Comparison with Similar Cases

While no exact precedent exists, the case parallels Baah-Baah v. Ghana (2023), where the Supreme Court emphasized the state’s duty to uphold constitutional rights. However, the AG’s role in that case was active, highlighting a stark contrast with the current situation. Comparatively, Kenya’s Supreme Court recently ruled against the AG for similar delays, setting a regional benchmark for accountability in judicial proceedings.

Legal Implications

Constitutional Violations

Under Article 12 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, every person has the right to life, liberty, and due process. Essuman argued that the AG’s inaction constitutes a denial of due process to Torkonoo, creating a constitutional paradox where the defense’s absence compromises the complainant’s rights. This could prompt the CHRAJ to investigate the AG for breaches of constitutional ethics.

Potential Reforms

The case has reignited calls for reforms in Ghana’s legal system, including:

• Mandatory timelines for state responses in civil and constitutional cases.
• Penalties for deliberate procedural delays, such as fines or professional sanctions for AG officeholders.
• Enhanced judicial oversight to prevent executive interference in judicial matters.

Conclusion

The AG’s failure to file a statement of case in the Chief Justice Torkonoo lawsuit has raised urgent constitutional and procedural concerns. Essuman’s critique underscores the need for systemic reforms to ensure transparency, accountability, and efficiency in Ghana’s judicial processes. As the case remains unresolved, stakeholders must address these issues to restore public confidence in the legal system and uphold the principles of justice and fairness enshrined in the Constitution.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is the role of the Attorney General in Ghana’s legal system?

The AG serves as the primary legal advisor to the government and is responsible for defending the state in all legal proceedings. This includes representing the government in courts, as seen in the Torkonoo case.

Why is the AG’s failure to file a statement of case significant?

It delays the judicial process, creates procedural imbalances, and may violate constitutional obligations, thereby undermining the fairness of the trial.

How does this case affect public trust in Ghana’s judiciary?

Prolonged delays caused by state non-compliance can erode public confidence, signaling that the judiciary may favor certain parties or be influenced by external pressures.

What legal recourse does Chief Justice Torkonoo have against the AG’s inaction?

She may file a motion to compel the AG’s office to engage in the proceedings or seek intervention from oversight bodies like the judiciary’s disciplinary council.