Jean Mensa, EC Deputies ‘Saved’ Despite SALL Injustice and ‘Kalabule’
As NPP’s Propaganda Plans Crash
A bid widely perceived as an attempt by the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP) to capitalize politically on petitions seeking the removal of key state officials has collapsed, following a prima facie determination by the Chief Justice.
This follows the finding by the Chief Justice, Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, that there is no prima facie evidence to warrant further investigation into the petitions seeking the removal of the officials — some of whom are perceived to be sympathetic to the NPP and were appointed during the Akufo-Addo administration.
The outcome of the prima facie determination was confirmed by the Minister of Government Communications in a statement issued on Wednesday, February 18.
This comes despite the gross injustice done to the people of Santrokofi, Akpafu, Likpe, and Lolobi (SALL) in the Oti Region, who were denied representation in the 8th Parliament.
The petitions were received at Jubilee House in late 2025. The Minister of State in charge of Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, confirmed that 10 separate petitions had been filed under the constitutional removal process.
Seven of the petitions targeted the Electoral Commission (EC) Chair, Jean Mensa, and her two deputies — Dr Bossman Eric Asare and Samuel Tettey — while three sought the removal of the Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng.
In accordance with Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution, the petitions were referred to the Chief Justice for preliminary constitutional scrutiny.
The grounds cited by the petitioners — including one lodged by an EC staff member — alleged misconduct ranging from cronyism and abuse of office to gross incompetence, which they claimed had eroded public confidence in the affected institutions.
The petitioner against the EC leadership, Joseph Blankson Adumadzie, outlined a series of concerns regarding administration and integrity.
However, the specific details of the allegations remain confidential under constitutional provisions governing such proceedings.
After reviewing the submissions, the Chief Justice determined that no prima facie case had been established to justify further investigation or the setting up of a formal inquiry committee.
Under Article 146, this constitutional threshold must be met before a five-member committee can be constituted to investigate allegations of stated misbehaviour, incompetence or incapacity — the only grounds upon which such office-holders may be removed.
With the threshold not satisfied, the process effectively ends at the preliminary stage.
The petitions had sparked broader public debate about accountability and institutional independence. Critics argue that removal processes involving high-ranking public officials must be handled with caution and confidentiality until the required constitutional threshold is met, in order to protect institutional integrity and individual reputations.
