CJ's removal: Supreme Court cannot intervene in removal petitions – Kwaku Azar cites legal precedent

Legal scholar Kwaku Asare, widely known as Kwaku Azar, has cited a landmark Supreme Court ruling to underscore that Ghana’s apex court lacks jurisdiction to intervene in matters related to the removal of a public officer under Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.

His statement comes in the wake of three petitions filed for the removal of the Chief Justice, which have been submitted to the President and subsequently referred to the Council of State for consultation.

The petition was initiated by Vincent Assafuah, the Member of Parliament for Old Tafo Constituency in the Ashanti Region, and was presented through former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame.

In his argument, Kwaku Azar referenced the case Ghana Bar Association v. Attorney-General & Anor [1995–96] 1 GLR 598 at p. 611, where the Supreme Court ruled that it does not have "original concurrent jurisdiction with the body empowered to exercise jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters properly falling within the parameters of Article 146."

According to him, this ruling reinforces the constitutional principle that when specific adjudicatory powers are assigned to a designated body—such as the Article 146 procedures for the removal of public officers—the Supreme Court cannot assume jurisdiction or intervene in the process.

His remarks have reignited discussions about the judiciary’s role in high-profile removal petitions, though Kwaku Azar made it clear that his statement was not legal advice and was not intended to influence any pending or future cases.