Parliament has, after several deliberations, approved the nomination of Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie as Ghana's Chief Justice.

The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, confirmed his approval on Thursday, November 11, during the 15th Sitting of the 3rd meeting.

"This Honorable house has accordingly approved the nomination of Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie as Chief Justice of the Republic, in accordance with Article 114 clause 1 of the 1992 Constitution respectively.

"I will want to take this opportunity to, on behalf of the House congratulate the nominee on his approval by Parliament. I urge the nominee to take all that has happened right up from the day of the nomination up to his prior approval by Parliament into consideration in his tenure of office. Once again congratulations," he added.

Parliament concluded his nomination after a headcount, where the Majority in Parliament counted 163 and the Minority 69.

On Monday, November 10, Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie appeared before the Appointments Committee of Parliament for his vetting.

In October, President John Dramani Mahama submitted Justice Baffoe-Bonnie’s name to the Council of State for consideration in accordance with Article 144(1) of the Constitution, which requires the President to act in consultation with the Council of State and with Parliament’s approval when appointing a Chief Justice.

Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, the most senior member of the Supreme Court, was appointed to the apex court in June 2008 by then-President John Agyekum Kufuor. He studied law at the University of Ghana and was called to the Bar in 1983. His judicial career spans roles as a Circuit Court Judge in Kumasi, a High Court Judge at Duayaw Nkwanta, and a Court of Appeal Judge before his elevation to the Supreme Court.

Born on December 26, 1956, in Goaso, Justice Baffoe-Bonnie had his secondary education at Konongo Odumase Secondary School before pursuing law at the University of Ghana and the Ghana Law School.

However, speaking on the floor of Parliament on Friday, November 7, Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin said it would be inappropriate to proceed with the vetting of Acting Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie while the former Chief Justice awaits a court verdict on her pending lawsuit.

In October, Gertrude Torkornoo initiated legal action to prevent the vetting and appointment of Justice Baffoe-Bonnie as Ghana’s next Chief Justice. She is seeking the nullification of all activities carried out by the Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang Committee, which was set up under Article 146 to review petitions seeking her removal from office.

She further wants the court to overturn all proceedings undertaken by the said Committee and to declare the Presidential Warrant authorizing her dismissal as unlawful and without legal effect. The legal move came as Parliament’s Appointments Committee prepared to vet Justice Baffoe-Bonnie for the top judicial position.

Afenyo-Markin emphasized that commencing the vetting of the appointed CJ would breach judicial propriety. According to him, given the ongoing disputes surrounding the revocation of the former Chief Justice from office, proceeding with the vetting process could undermine Articles 125 and 127 of the Constitution.

“Proceeding to vet a new person to fill that office will be rendering the application of justice. We are not into blows; we are here to argue law and for you to determine. This kind of attack, ‘it will happen, it will happen,’ is inappropriate. They should take it easy,” Afenyo-Markin said.

Article 125 gives judicial power only to the courts and not to Parliament or the Executive. Article 127, on the other hand, requires all other state institutions not to interfere with the Judiciary’s work but to protect its independence.

But the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, dismissed the motion presented by the Minority caucus. According to him, granting such a request would create a dangerous precedent, explaining that “any litigant could hold Parliament hostage—that is, file a case and freeze the work of Parliament and its committees.”

He ruled that “there is no constitutional or standing order basis for Parliament to halt the process simply because there are pending cases in court. The motion is inadmissible and has been returned to the sponsor, the Minority Leader, Honorable Alexander Afenyo-Markin, as stated clearly by our Standing Orders.”

The five-member committee, backed by Article 146, concluded its investigations last month and recommended the Chief Justice’s removal from office. Acting on the committee’s recommendations, President Mahama relieved Justice Gertrude Torkornoo of her duties with immediate effect on Monday, September 1.

The Chief Justice was earlier suspended by President Mahama on Tuesday, April 22, after a prima facie case was established following multiple petitions calling for her removal.

Among the petitions was one filed by a group known as Shining Stars of Ghana, alleging that she violated Article 144 of the Constitution by personally recommending judges for promotion to the Supreme Court. The group also claimed she ruled on a case involving the Speaker of Parliament without granting him a hearing, despite his refusal to respond to the suit.

Another petition from a police officer who is also a lawyer accused the Chief Justice of manipulating evidence and abusing her authority during a Supreme Court session where he was reportedly reprimanded, arrested, and detained.

Court records, however, show that the lawyer’s conduct during proceedings prompted a unanimous caution from the bench, not just from the Chief Justice.

A third petition, submitted by a private individual, listed 21 alleged misconducts and four claims of incompetence, including the misuse of public funds—specifically, spending over GH¢261,000 and $30,000 on a family trip abroad in 2023, and misusing an additional GH¢75,580 and $14,000 during another foreign assignment without proper accountability.

Subsequent reports indicate that two more petitions were later filed, intensifying pressure on the Judiciary.

Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, in her written response to President Mahama, strongly denied allegations of misconduct and abuse of office, describing them as baseless and lacking grounds for her removal.

In July, an application for review filed by the embattled Chief Justice at the Human Rights Division of the Accra High Court was dismissed. The court, presided over by Justice Amoako on Thursday, July 31, ruled that several claims—such as the illegal composition of the committee and wrongful conduct of proceedings—were already before the Supreme Court.

Justice Amoako stated that relitigating these issues would result in duplication and abuse of court processes and therefore dismissed the case.

The Chief Justice’s judicial review application, filed on June 9, sought nine reliefs, including declarations that the Article 146 Committee acted unlawfully and violated her right to a fair hearing.

As the Article 146 Committee’s proceedings are held in camera in accordance with Article 146(8) of the Constitution, the court noted that it could not inquire into certain matters raised by the suspended Chief Justice.

Following these developments, Justice Gertrude Torkornoo proceeded to the ECOWAS Community Court in Abuja, Nigeria, seeking $10 million in compensation over her suspension.

Her application includes 10 reliefs, among them a request for precautionary measures ensuring she continues to enjoy the entitlements of her office pending the final determination of the case.

Meanwhile, government spokesperson Felix Kwakye Ofosu has refuted Justice Torkornoo’s claims, insisting that her suspension aligns with the Constitution.

On Thursday, August 14, the Bar Council of England and Wales and the Commonwealth Lawyers Association jointly called for the immediate reinstatement of Ghana’s Chief Justice by President Mahama and the Executive arm of government.

“Immediately and without delay, reinstate the Chief Justice of Ghana to her office, consistent with both the hitherto strong attachment to the rule of law demonstrated by Ghana and the constitutional duties incumbent upon them,” the statement said.

The groups further urged a fair and transparent investigation into the disciplinary charges against her and the establishment of clear procedural rules with a definite timeframe for the Committee’s work.