Acting CEO of the Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod), Sammy Gyamfi, has called out the New Patriotic Party (NPP) for what he terms blatant double standards in the ongoing Chief Justice removal proceedings. Speaking on Joy FM’s Super Morning Show, Gyamfi expressed disbelief that the NPP would question a process they themselves invoked in the past.
Gyamfi stressed that Ghana’s democracy must be grounded in the rule of law, not the whims of individuals. Citing Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution—which lays out the exact steps for removing a Chief Justice—he challenged critics to identify any deviation by President Akufo-Addo or the Council of State. “If our democracy is to thrive, we must all defend the Constitution and honour those who abide by it,” Gyamfi emphasised.
Contrary to suggestions that the President orchestrated the Chief Justice’s ouster, Gyamfi clarified that five separate petitions were lodged by citizens alleging misconduct, not by the Presidency. He walked listeners through the constitutional dance:
-
Petitions submitted directly to the President
-
President transmitted both petitions and the Chief Justice’s responses to the Council of State
-
Council of State—by a 30–1 majority—found a prima facie case
-
President formed an investigative committee, then suspended the Chief Justice based on its report
At every step, Gyamfi insisted, the President merely executed his sworn duty to defend the Constitution.
Turning to history, Gyamfi reminded the NPP that it previously invoked Article 146 to suspend four Supreme Court justices under former President Akufo-Addo in 2018—and that President John Mahama dismissed CHRAJ boss Lauretta Lamptey in 2013 after NPP petitions over alleged fund misuse. “When your own members petitioned, you acted without hesitation; now you ask the President to ignore petitions?” he asked.
Gyamfi warned that insisting the Chief Justice is somehow “above the law” risks undermining Ghana’s constitutional framework. He urged all political actors—especially lawyers in the NPP—to uphold, rather than subvert, the processes enshrined in our supreme law.
0 Comments