The ECOWAS Community Court of Justice has dismissed an application for interim measures filed by former Chief Justice Gertrude Esaaba Sackey-Torkornoo, who sought to halt ongoing processes for her removal from office and secure her reinstatement with full entitlements while her human rights case proceeds.
In its ruling delivered on Wednesday, November 19, the Court held that Torkornoo’s request failed to meet the legal threshold required for the grant of interim or provisional measures.
According to updates provided by Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem Sai, who represented the State, the ECOWAS Court was emphatic that the former Chief Justice did not demonstrate the “urgency” or “imminent and irreparable harm” necessary to warrant injunctive relief.
Quoting directly from the ruling, Dr Srem Sai said the Court found that: “The Applicant’s own conduct defeats her claim of imminent and irreparable harm. The Court is, therefore, satisfied that the Applicant has not demonstrated the existence of imminent or exceptional circumstance that will justify the urgency of the application filed almost 3 months after the act complained of.”
The Court further held that because Torkornoo failed to satisfy the requirement of urgency, a mandatory and cumulative criterion, there was no basis to assess the remaining requirements for provisional measures.
As stated in the judgment:
“In the light of the Applicant’s failure to meet the requirement of urgency, the Court finds no basis to assess the remaining criteria for provisional measures, same being cumulative. The request for provisional measures as outlined by the Applicant, same not substantiated, is therefore dismissed.”
The ruling followed a preliminary objection filed by the State, which argued that the ECOWAS Court lacked jurisdiction because the issues touched on constitutional interpretation already settled by the Supreme Court of Ghana.
However, the ECOWAS Court dismissed the State’s objection, holding that Torkornoo’s petition falls within its human rights jurisdiction, as she alleges violations of her rights to fair hearing, dignity, and employment protections.
The substantive human rights case will proceed, but the Court has refused to freeze the removal process or reinstate the former Chief Justice while it is pending.