Former Auditor-General Daniel Yao Domevelo, who was a member of the committee that handled the petitions against former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, has accused former Attorney-General Nii Ayikoi Otoo of presenting fake documents as evidence during the in-camera proceedings.
Mr Domelevo said he found it interesting that Mr Ayikoi would present such documents to the committee to defend Madam Torkornoo.
Speaking on the KSM show, Mr Domelevo said, “Let us come to Mr Ayikoi Otoo’s account of me, I find it very interesting. He said he has provided all the evidence to Mr Domelevo, a former Auditor-General, and I sat there and didn’t take it. I want to put it on record that he provided us with evidence that was fake. It will interest you to know that it is the junior of the Chief Justice, the Judicial Secretary, who appointed the Chief Justice; that letter that he produced was signed by the Judicial Secretary appointing her as Chief Justice.”
It is recalled that Ayikoi Otoo accused the committee that recommended the removal of the Chief Justice of disregarding critical evidence, including the judiciary’s official travel policy.
In an interview on Joy FM on Monday, September 1, Nii Ayikoi Otoo insisted that Justice Torkornoo’s request to embark on vacation was fully compliant with established entitlements and procedures.
“When these entitlements come, it is not for you to determine anything. You only decide whether you want to travel. Once you indicate, the officers work out your entitlements and bring them to you. You are not personally involved,” he explained, emphasising that the Chief Justice did not allocate allowances herself.
According to him, the judiciary’s travel policy—submitted in evidence during the hearings—clearly allows a Chief Justice to travel with a companion of their choice, particularly in situations where there is no spouse. He noted that previous Chief Justices had also exercised this option.
“The travel policy was submitted, but the committee never referred to it. She was entitled to travel with one person of her choice, and she did so,” he said.
Mr Otoo dismissed claims of financial impropriety, arguing that any dispute over allowances should have been handled through an audit process rather than being used as grounds for removal.
“Assuming it was wrongly given, is that not why you have auditors? They should surcharge you if you took something unlawfully. Is that a ground for removal?” he asked, stressing that the Judicial Secretary, not the Chief Justice, is the designated spending officer.
Expressing disbelief at the committee’s findings, he singled out the role of Daniel Domelevo, a former Auditor-General who served on the panel.
“I’m surprised Daniel Domelevo, a former Auditor-General, was on it. He heard us, he saw the evidence. Yet in the face of all this, they still concluded she misappropriated money. Which money?” he questioned.
