Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, the Deputy Attorney General and Minister for Justice, has justified the recent suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo, asserting that there is no constitutional barrier preventing the president from acting while a case is still under consideration by the Supreme Court.
His comments came in response to criticism from former Member of Parliament and legal practitioner Samuel Atta Akyea, who labeled the suspension as unconstitutional and potentially contemptuous towards the Supreme Court.
Atta Akyea referenced an interlocutory injunction application submitted by the MP for Old Tafo, Vincent Ekow Assafuah, which remains unresolved.
In an interview on Wednesday, April 23, 2025, Dr. Srem-Sai elaborated that public officials are required to navigate conflicting interests and cannot be expected to suspend all actions merely due to the initiation of a legal dispute.
He emphasized that unless a court has issued a specific injunction to suspend a public duty, it is legally acceptable for the president or any public official to continue their responsibilities.
He noted, ‘When individuals make such claims, they often overlook the necessity of balancing interests as a public servant. If the president were to declare, ‘I will refrain from acting until a court ruling is rendered,’ it must be acknowledged that there exists a group of individuals who are dissatisfied and have followed the constitutionally mandated process to seek a specific resolution.
This is why the law does not obligate anyone to cease their public duties solely due to the grievances of an individual. In fact, for every public decision, action, or step taken, there will invariably be someone who feels wronged, and it is not feasible to halt one’s duties based solely on the complaints of that individual.’
The prevailing legal interpretation suggests that failing to address the grievances of the affected individual would constitute an injustice. Consequently, it is asserted that the obligation to serve the public must persist until a court issues a definitive ruling to cease such duty. In this instance, there is no court order in place to halt the suspension process of the Chief Justice, he remarked.
