Media reports coming in suggest that President Mahama has, through his Secretary, Dr Callistus Mahama, written to Her Ladyship the Chief Justice to notify her of 3 petitions against her, and has given her 10 days to respond accordingly. Copies of the 3 petitions have also been dispatched to her.
It is instructive to note that, the President took this decision after the Council of State, through its Chairman, Doe Adjaho, on March 27, 2025 acknowledged receipt of Mr President’s letter dated March 25, 2025. Thus, the decision to request a response from the Chief Justice had nothing to do with her request to be served with copies of the petitions.
By this act, the President is complying with the present procedure of the law on the removal CJ as espoused by Justice Date Bah in the Agyei Twum case.
For emphasis, the Council of State acknowledged receipt of the President’s letter on March 27, the very day the Chief Justice wrote to the President demanding copies of the petition in order to respond. Per the decision in the Agyei Twum case, until the Council of State is notified of the petitions, the CJ cannot be requested to give her response.
This forms the basis why some of us believe the CJ, with due respect to Her, jumped the gun by requesting for copies of the petition when the President had not yet sorted things out with the Council. As for the one in court claiming that the President erred by not consulting the Council of State before establishing a prima facie case, he is not different from Richard Sky who rushed to court to challenged the passage of the LGBTQ bill at a time the act he sought to challenged had not been done. Doctrine of ripeness “chop am falaa”.
Without prejudicing the outcome of the case before the Supreme Court, the very act Assafuah is alleging the President to have done, the basis of his suit, has not yet been done. In fact, that act would be done after 10 days when the President gets the CJ’s response.
After the 10 days, it is not automatic that the President, in consultation with the Council, would establish prima facie case against the CJ. The CJ’s response to allegations in the 3 petitions would determine whether a prima facie case would be established or not. It may will be that after the CJ’s response, the President may truncate the removal process on the basis that the petitions are baseless and disclose no prima facie case.
It’ll be interesting to see how the Supreme Court would deal with the injunction application, that is, if Assafuah does not withdraw it on or before the hearing date. The fruit Assafuah wanted to eat had not ripen. The consequences of eating unripe mango, as we were told, is fever!
Source: The Oracle