Afenyo-Markin, Ayariga Hijack Chief Justice Nominee Vetting With Early Clash: "Acting in Bad Faith"
- Alexander Afenyo-Markin was at the centre of more controversy during the vetting for the new Chief Justice nominee
- The Minority Leader unsuccessfully tried to deliver a statement on the removal of the former CJ Getrude Torkornoo
- Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga was the main source of opposition to the Minority Leader on November 10, 2025
Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin stole the show again at the start of an appointment committee hearing on November 10, 2025.
Afenyo-Markin and the Majority Leader, Mahama Ayariga, clashed indirectly during the vetting of Chief Justice nominee Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie because of his view that the nominee is disputed.
Source: Facebook
The heated debate started after the Majority Leader objected to the Minority Leader’s description, calling it inappropriate and politically charged.
The contentions relate to the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, who is challenging her removal from office in court.
Responding to the objection, Afenyo-Markin argued that the Majority was attempting to stifle legitimate parliamentary debate.
He maintained that the Minority had every right to express its reservations about the nomination, which he described as politically motivated.
The Minority Leader further insisted that the vetting process was a civic duty, not a partisan contest, and that questioning the circumstances surrounding the nomination was within their constitutional mandate.
The minority had previously called for the vetting to be put on hold because of Torkornoo's legal fight.
Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, however, dismissed a motion Afenyo-Markin filed seeking to suspend the vetting until ongoing court cases involving Torkornoo are resolved.
Bagbin explained that Parliament’s legislative and oversight duties could not be halted over a court case.
Why was Torkornoo removed as Chief Justice?
Torkornoo was removed following a recommendation by the committee probing complaints against her.
She had been on suspension since April 2025 after complaints were lodged against her in five petitions.
The investigative committee found that grounds of stated misbehaviour had been established following its probe.
According to the Presidency, the committee reviewed 10,000 pages of evidence submitted and heard from 13 witnesses on behalf of the first petitioner.
The chief justice also testified and called 12 other witnesses, including experts.
Source: Facebook
What findings led to Torkornoo's removal?
The committee pushed for Torkornoo's removal because of unlawful expenditure of public funds, abuse of discretionary power, and interference in judicial appointments.
For the unlawful expenditure of public funds, she authorised the Judicial Service to cover travel expenses and per diem allowances for her husband and daughter during private holiday trips in 2023.
With respect to the grounds of abuse of discretionary power, her handling of the transfer violated Article 296(a) and (b) of the Constitution and amounted to misbehaviour.
Torkornoo sues for compensation from the government
YEN.com.gh also reported that Torkornoo had sued the government for $10 million in compensation as she fought against her impeachment.
She claimed that her initial suspension from office violated her rights to a fair hearing under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Proofreading by Bruce Douglas, copy editor at YEN.com.gh.
Source: YEN.com.gh
