When The Law Bites: Ghana’s CJ and UK’s Deputy PM fall to legal technicalities

Two women from vastly different political and social backgrounds, Justice Gertrude Araba Esaba Sackey Torkonoo of Ghana and Angela Rayner of the United Kingdom, lost their high-profile public offices this week — both victims of the iron grip of the law.

Justice Torkonoo, Ghana’s Chief Justice, was dismissed by President John Mahama following recommendations from a constitutionally mandated committee that reviewed petitions against her conduct.

Across the globe, Angela Rayner, Britain’s Deputy Prime Minister and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, stepped down after an inquiry concluded she had breached the UK’s Ministerial Code in relation to tax obligations tied to a property purchase.

While the two cases are different in substance, they share a striking parallel — the rigid application of legal principles to powerful figures, igniting debate over whether “the law is the law” or whether “the law is an ass.”

The Angela Rayner Case

Angela Rayner’s downfall stemmed from a complex property transaction.

1. Four years ago, Rayner and her then-husband purchased a home. Following their divorce, the couple, mindful of their disabled child’s lifelong care needs, established a trust to hold part of the property’s value for the child’s benefit. Rayner retained some share in her name.

2. When she later decided to purchase her own home, she sold her portion of the original house to the trust, making herself — at least legally — without a home. She then bought a new property as her sole residence.

3. On paper, everything appeared above board. But under UK tax law, because her disabled child was still a minor, Rayner was still considered the beneficial owner of the first property, despite the trust arrangement.

4. This meant that her tax status was misrepresented. By treating her new property as her only home, she avoided paying about £40,000 in taxes.

Rayner insisted she did not know the law treated her as a homeowner under these circumstances.

Legal experts acknowledge that trust law is notoriously complex, and the Prime Minister’s ethics adviser even found that she acted with integrity.

However, the adviser faulted her for not seeking expert guidance earlier.

In the end, though sympathetic, the conclusion was clear: she had broken the Ministerial Code.

Rayner resigned her positions, a dramatic fall for a woman who rose from a disadvantaged background — leaving school with no qualifications, becoming a mother at 16 — to one of the most powerful offices in the UK.

The Ghanaian Parallel

Back in Ghana, Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo’s removal has sparked equally heated debate. While President Mahama acted in line with constitutional provisions, critics question whether the breaches attributed to her merited such a severe sanction.

The controversy deepened when observers noted the hypocrisy of some international actors.

Professor Adams Bodomo, a Ghanaian academic, pointed out that while voices in London were quick to caution Ghana about constitutional processes in the judiciary, few appeared willing to confront the legal technicalities that ended Rayner’s political career.

The Bigger Question: Law or Ass?

The twin cases raise a fundamental question about governance and fairness: should the law be applied so rigidly that even technical missteps lead to the downfall of capable leaders, or should context and intent matter more?

For Rayner, a minor technical breach in tax law — compounded by her failure to seek advice — overshadowed her contributions and forced her out.

For Justice Torkonoo, questions remain about whether her removal was a proportionate response or a political decision dressed in constitutional garb.