BY Daniel Bampoe
A major political confrontation is expected in Parliament today, Monday November 10, 2025, as the Minority Caucus vows to resist the vetting of Acting Chief Justice, Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie.
The caucus maintains that the vetting process must be suspended until all legal disputes surrounding the removal of the immediate past Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Torkornoo, are conclusively determined by the courts.
The brewing standoff follows Speaker of Parliament, Rt. Hon. Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin’s ruling last Friday, November 7, rejecting a formal motion by the Minority to halt the vetting of Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, who has been nominated by President John Dramani Mahama as the substantive Chief Justice.
The Speaker’s decision has heightened tensions ahead of today’s scheduled appearance of the nominee before the Appointments Committee.
Speaker Upholds Parliament’s Constitutional Mandate
In his ruling, Speaker Bagbin emphasized that Parliament cannot suspend its constitutional duties merely because of a pending case in court.
He declared the Minority’s motion “inadmissible” and warned against allowing external legal proceedings to dictate the pace of parliamentary work.
“There is no constitutional or standing order basis for Parliament to halt the process simply because there are pending cases in court,” the Speaker stated.
“Should I accept that argument, any litigant could hold Parliament hostage by filing a case and freezing the work of Parliament and its committees.”
The Speaker explained that under Article 144(1) of the 1992 Constitution, Parliament has a clear responsibility to consider the President’s nomination for Chief Justice without delay.
He insisted that legislative processes must continue unless an injunction is explicitly issued by a competent court.
He further argued that the Supreme Court retains the power to reverse any act found unconstitutional, including the removal of a sitting Chief Justice.
“If there is any unconstitutionality in the process leading to Justice Torkornoo’s removal, the Supreme Court is vested with authority to restore the status quo,” he noted.
Alban Bagbin concluded that judicial independence must not be mistaken for legislative paralysis, warning that such a precedent would undermine the principle of separation of powers.
Minority Vows to Block Vetting
Despite the Speaker’s ruling, Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin declared that his caucus would resist any attempt to proceed with the vetting of Justice Baffoe-Bonnie today.
Speaking passionately on the floor, he argued that continuing with the process while Justice Torkornoo’s case remains before the courts would be a violation of due process and an affront to constitutional order.
“We will not support any business committee report that contains plans for vetting on Monday. That vetting will not happen; it will not happen. The law must be respected,” Afenyo-Markin asserted.
The Minority insists that Justice Torkornoo’s rights must be upheld, and her ongoing legal challenge at both the Supreme Court and ECOWAS Court should not be rendered meaningless by Parliament’s action.
“She is a Ghanaian who has gone through all due processes. Her case is pending before the courts, and her rights must not be trampled upon,” the Minority Leader stressed.
He accused the Majority side of disregarding the rule of law and rushing the vetting process for political convenience, warning that the opposition will not be part of any process that undermines judicial credibility.
Background: From Dismissal To Dispute
The unfolding crisis in Parliament is rooted in the dramatic dismissal of Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Torkornoo earlier this year by President John Dramani Mahama.
Her suspension and subsequent removal triggered widespread condemnation from sections of the legal fraternity, civil society, and opposition parties, who described the move as unconstitutional and politically motivated.
Justice Torkornoo has since challenged her removal both in Ghana’s Supreme Court and at the ECOWAS Court of Justice in Abuja.
She argues that the process violated her right to a fair hearing and contravened constitutional procedures for removing a sitting Chief Justice.
At the ECOWAS Court, she is seeking her reinstatement and $10 million in damages for wrongful dismissal. The Ghanaian government, represented by Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem Sai, has objected to the regional court’s jurisdiction, arguing that constitutional interpretation falls exclusively within the mandate of Ghana’s Supreme Court.
