The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has suspended its nationwide “Thank You Tour” to participate in a major protest called the “Save the Judiciary Demo,” set for May 5, 2025.
The demonstration is being organised by a coalition of five political parties in response to President John Mahama’s suspension of Chief Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Sackey Torkornoo.
The parties argue that the President’s action threatens the independence of the judiciary.
Henry Nana Boakye, also known as Nana B, the NPP’s National Organiser, told Asaase News that the protest is a national duty and takes precedence over party activities. He said the NPP wants to send a strong message to the government.
“This is not just a political issue. We are standing up for all Ghanaians and protecting our democracy,” he said.
Nana Boakye also noted that it was encouraging to see the Minority in Parliament support the protest, adding that a united voice would send a clear signal to the government.
Read Also >>>> Adu-Boahen remanded in EOCO custody for 7 days
Meanwhile, a Private legal practitioner and a member of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), Justice Abdulai, has thrown his support behind the decision by President John Dramani Mahama to suspend Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, insisting the action is constitutionally justified and backed by proper legal procedure.
His comments come in reaction to a resolution passed by the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), which described the suspension as unconstitutional and without legal basis under the 1992 Constitution, calling for its immediate revocation.
However, speaking on The Big Issue on Channel One TV on Saturday, May 3, Justice Abdulai dismissed the GBA’s position and questioned its legal foundation.
” I completely disagree with the resolution and every single letter in the resolution that was passed,” he stated.
According to him, the president and the Council of State acted within the law and took into account all relevant responses, including that of the Chief Justice.
“The response of the CJ is not ordinarily supposed to form part of the basis for the determination whether or not a prima facie case has been made. However, in this particular case, considering that these advances were made and accepted by the president.
“It means that the Council of State and the president took into consideration the response of the CJ and came to the determination that indeed, a prima facie case has been determined,” he revealed.
