A political scientist at the University for Development Studies (UDS), Dr. Alidu Bukari Gbensuglo, has backed calls for the term “stated misbehaviour” to be clearly defined and codified in Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, following the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo from office by President Mahama.
President John Mahama, on Monday, September 1, removed Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo from office with immediate effect on grounds of stated misbehaviour.
This follows recommendations from a constitutional committee set up under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.
Speaking on JoyNews’ AM Show, Dr Gbensuglo said it has become necessary to spell out what constitutes misbehaviour to guide actions involving the removal of public officials, including high-ranking judicial officers.
“I am tempted to agree with those who suggest that stated misbehaviour should be codified in the Constitution so that it will be clear and we will all have a common understanding of what constitutes wrongdoing and what does not—what can be determined as misbehaviour or otherwise—and use that as a basis to remove someone from office,” he said.
Dr. Gbensuglo described the ongoing political exchanges between the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) over the issue as disappointing.
“Sometimes I have a problem with the way the NDC and NPP argue among themselves in respect of the Constitution. For me, it is embarrassing and shameful,” he stated.
He reminded political leaders that Ghana’s Constitution, which was overwhelmingly endorsed by citizens on April 28, 1992, must be respected regardless of who occupies the highest office.
“As citizens, it shouldn’t matter who is in power—whether Mahama or whoever—all the person needs to do is implement what the Constitution says he or she should do,” Dr. Gbensuglo emphasised.
While acknowledging that past administrations, including Mahama’s previous government, had made similar decisions without controversy, the political scientist cautioned against selective outrage in constitutional matters.
“Of course, we have seen past governments do the same. Even Mahama once sacked someone from office, and people didn’t make much noise about it—but now the concern is about the Chief Justice,” he observed.
Dr. Gbensuglo called for consistency and a strict adherence to constitutional principles.
“I will always say that what is just and fair is the law. So let’s go there and interpret the Constitution. If Mahama is wrong, then the right thing should be done. Yes, I agree with those who are calling for that—it’s a good call, and that’s my position on it. Otherwise, anybody can just do something and they will say it’s this and not that, but once it is defined in the Constitution, it is fine, and I agree with that perfectly,” he added.