President John Dramani Mahama has brought closure to a controversial petition seeking the removal of Supreme Court Justice, Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, af
President John Dramani Mahama has brought closure to a controversial petition seeking the removal of Supreme Court Justice, Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, after the Chief Justice, Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, determined that the allegations failed to meet the constitutional threshold for further action.
In a decision that underscores the constitutional safeguards surrounding the removal of superior court judges, the President dismissed the petition on the advice of the Chief Justice, citing the absence of a prima facie case as required under Article 146(3) of the 1992 Constitution.
The decision was formally communicated in a letter dated 4 December 2025, signed by Dr Callistus Mahama, Secretary to the President, and addressed to the petitioner, Daniel Marfo Ofori-Atta.
According to the letter, President Mahama had, in line with constitutional procedure, referred the petition to the Chief Justice on 20 October 2025 for a preliminary assessment.
After reviewing the petition and its accompanying evidence, the Chief Justice concluded that the allegations collapsed under scrutiny.
In his response dated 2 December 2025, Justice Baffoe-Bonnie stated that the petitioner’s own evidential material undermined the factual foundation of the claims against Justice Kulendi.
The Chief Justice specifically addressed accusations that Justice Kulendi had abused his office to secure bail for his cousin, Richard Jakpa, and had sought to improperly influence the outcome of a criminal case.
When weighed against the sworn testimony of Jakpa, the Chief Justice found that the claims amounted to a distortion of the record and lacked any credible evidentiary basis.
“In the circumstances,” the Chief Justice noted, “the petitioner’s own evidential material undermines and collapses the factual foundation of the allegations.”
He therefore determined that the petition failed to establish a prima facie case, effectively ending the matter at the preliminary stage.
Based on this determination, President Mahama concluded that no further constitutional steps were required and formally closed the case, bringing an end to speculation about a possible inquiry or impeachment process against the Supreme Court justice.
Origins of the petition
Daniel Marfo Ofori-Atta submitted his petition to the President on 2 October 2025, shortly after lodging a similar complaint with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service.
In his public statements at the time, Ofori-Atta said he was pursuing both criminal and constitutional avenues to challenge what he described as judicial misconduct.
The petition was rooted in the high-profile criminal trial, Republic v Cassiel Ato Forson & 2 Others, in which Richard Jakpa—currently Director of Special Operations at the National Security Secretariat—was the third accused.
Ofori-Atta alleged that Justice Kulendi attempted to interfere with the administration of justice in the case, conduct he argued amounted to stated misbehaviour and rendered the judge unfit to remain on the Supreme Court bench.
The move was widely seen as politically and institutionally sensitive, particularly coming on the heels of President Mahama’s recent removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, a decision that had already heightened tensions and debate over executive-judicial relations.
Profile of Justice Kulendi
Justice Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi was sworn into office as a Justice of the Supreme Court on 26 May 2020 by President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, alongside Professor Henrietta J.A.N. Mensa-Bonsu.
Their appointments followed vetting by Parliament’s Appointments Committee on 11 and 12 May 2020, and subsequent approval by Parliament on 20 May 2020.
Beyond the courtroom, Justice Kulendi has been candid about his unconventional path to the bench.
Speaking at the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA) on 10 November 2022 during an engagement with law students dubbed “Conversation with a Judge,” he revealed that he never set out to become a judge, describing his elevation to the Supreme Court as a form of “conscription” into judicial service.
Constitutional implications
With the dismissal of the petition, the presidency has signalled adherence to the constitutional framework governing judicial accountability, reinforcing the role of the Chief Justice as the gatekeeper in determining whether allegations against superior court judges merit formal investigation.
For now, the decision draws a line under a potentially explosive confrontation between the executive and the judiciary, while reaffirming the high evidentiary bar required before a sitting Supreme Court justice can be subjected to removal proceedings.
COMMENTS