- A petitioner, Daniel Ofori, accused Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo of misappropriating public funds to finance private foreign trips for herself, her husband, and her daughter in 2023.
- Documentary evidence and Judicial Service travel policies dating back to 2010 — confirmed by the Judicial Secretary — show the Chief Justice was entitled to travel with a spouse or companion at state expense, making the claims baseless.
- The Chief Justice also presented evidence of proper retirement of a $14,000 imprest from one of the trips, effectively discrediting allegations of financial impropriety.
Documentary evidence submitted to the President by Her Ladyship the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo, and forwarded to the Justice Pwamang committee, shows the Chief Justice never misappropriated any monies as alleged by Mr. Daniel Ofori in his petition to the President.
For reference, the allegation of Mr. Daniel Ofori shall be given. The response of the Chief Justice shall follow. Then the letter from the Judicial Service and Judicial Secretary with a bank statement making the allegation of Mr. Daniel Ofori false shall then follow.
Below are the three allegations made by Mr. Daniel Ofori, who is represented by his long-time counsel, the learned Thaddeus Sory. The allegations suggest that the Chief Justice misappropriated funds owing to foreign travels undertaken by her, her husband, and her daughter.
READ ALSO:
DANIEL OFORI’S ALLEGATIONS
“7. FIRST
What does this mean for you?
A man named Daniel Ofori accused the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo, of using public money meant for official duties to pay for personal foreign travels for herself, her husband, and her daughter. He claimed she took money for tickets and per diem allowances that they weren’t entitled to, and also claimed she didn’t properly account for travel funds given to her.
However — when this matter was investigated:
The Chief Justice presented official documents that showed she was actually allowed by Judicial Service rules to travel with her spouse or any person of her choice, with those expenses legally covered.
The policy has existed since 2010 and was updated in 2019 — and it clearly states the Chief Justice can travel with a family member or other person, with the Judicial Service paying for their ticket and half of her per diem.
The Judicial Secretary confirmed this in a report, clarifying that the trips in 2023 were legitimate under the official travel policy.
Also, regarding the $14,000 she was given for one of the trips, the Chief Justice proved that she used part of it and properly returned the rest to the state after the trip.
In fact, she explained that she fell ill on one of the trips, returned home early, and made sure everything was properly accounted for.
In 2023, the Honourable Chief Justice misappropriated the sum of GHS 261, 890.00 of public funds for the benefit of the Chief Justice for her private foreign travel with her husband, Mr. Francis Kofi Torkornoo, and her daughter Miss Edem SA Torkornoo and US$30,000 in per diem allowance when, to her knowledge, neither the husband of the Chief Justice nor the Chief Justice’s daughter were entitled to have their travel or any travel allowances paid for out of the funds of the Judicial Service.
8. SECOND
In 2023, the Honourable Chief Justice misappropriated the sum of GHS75,580.00 out of public funds for Ethiopian Airline tickets for the Honourable Chief Justice and her husband during the vacation of Her Ladyship to Arusha, Tanzania.
9. THIRD
In 2023, Her Ladyship the Honourable Chief Justice obtained from the Judicial Service an accountable imprest in the sum of $14,000.00 to the Honourable Chief Justice to travel with her husband to Arusha, Tanzania which he failed to retire.”
RESPONSE FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE
FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD ALLEGATIONS – TICKETS AND PER DIEM OF CHIEF JUSTICE
The petitioner alleges that as Chief Justice, I misappropriated the sum of Gh¢261, 890 of public funds for my private foreign travel with her husband Mr. Francis Torkornoo and my daughter Miss Edem Torkornoo when according to him, neither person was entitled to have their travel paid for out of the funds of the Judicial Service of Ghana.
My humble response is that the allegation is an unfortunate untruth. Please find herewith the following evidence.
Paragraph B1 provides for two holidays for the Chief Justice in a year with ‘Travel expenses, hotel accommodation and per diem to be borne by the judicial Service and capped at 14 days per round trip’
Exhibit DO (2) is the POLICY ON FOREIGN TRAVELS BY HEAD OF THE JUDICIARY AND SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES
Paragraph A (9) provides that ‘The Chief Justice shall undertake unlimited official travels with either his/her Spouse or other person of his/her choice in a year, fully funded by the Judicial Service.’
Paragraph A (10) provides that ‘Where the Chief Justice is accompanied by the Spouse or other person, he/shall travel on the same class of air ticket as the Chief Justice and shall be paid the equivalent of half the per diem paid to the Chief Justice’
This has been the policy of Judicial Service since 2010, as amended in 2019. Please see exhibit DO3
Exhibit DO(4) is a response to audit observation provided by the Judicial Secretary to auditors who sought clarification on the expenditure on the ticket purchased for my husband and daughter during my two holidays in 2023. On page 1 of Exhibit DO 4, the Judicial Secretary clarified that as Chief Justice, I opted to utilize the authorization in paragraph 9 and paragraph 10 of the Travel Policy to travel with my spouse and my daughter during my two holidays taken in September 2023 – pursuant to the conditions of appointment of the Chief Justice. In view of this option, there was no infraction occasioned when I opted to travel for my two holidays with my spouse on one occasion and my daughter on the second occasion. The Response to Observation 1 and Response to Observation 2 of exhibit DO4 provide explanation on expenditure on tickets for my husband and daughter that petitioner has unfortunately described as misappropriation of public funds by the Chief Justice.
Response on Page 3 of Exhibit DO4 further confirms thatcontrary to the unfortunate allegation that I failed to retire imprest of $14,000 given to me for my travel, I spent an amount of $4,411 out of the said imprest and retired the remaining $9,588.20. I also attach herewith exhibit DO 5 in further proof of the retirement of that imprest on 14th September 2023, on my second day at work after the said journey.
In September 2023, I fell ill from exhaustion when I arrived in Arusha and had to return to Ghana a day early, in order to ensure that I was able to have one full day to journey to Cape Coast for the annual conference of the Ghana Bar Association. This led to a change and re-routing of my return journey to Ghana through Ethiopia Airline. Page 4 of Exhibit DO 4 provides information on this.
It is therefore unfortunate that the Petitioner, an utsider to the records of Judicial Service, should create the wrong presentation of this expenditure used for the purchase of tickets for the Chief Justice. I wish to state that as Chief Justice, I neither purchase travel tickets, nor determine the per diem issued to me or issued to the aides, security or persons who are required to travel with me. Neither do I authorize the per diem given to me for any journey. The said per diem is determined in accordance with rates set by the Article 71 Committee on Emoluments for the Chief Justice of the Republic. It is also administered by the Judicial Secretary and the Director of Finance of the Judicial Service. I am therefore incapable of misappropriating any public funds with respect to a ticket purchased for me or the person accompanying me on a journey, or the per diem issued. Indeed, I am not signatory to any account and do not have access to the accounts of the Judicial Service.
THE EVIDENCE – EXHIBIT “DO 4” AND EXHIBIT “DO 5”
EXHIBIT DO 4
EXHIBIT DO 5