Director of Legal Affairs for the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), Godwin Edudzi Kudzo Tameklo, is facing a wave of public and intra-party criticism over posting on social media of a video showing a contentious encounter between three Supreme Court judges and prominent lawyer Thaddeus Sory, counsel for petitioners seeking the removal of Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo.
Tameklo, who shared the silent CCTV footage on social media, has been accused of muddying the waters in an already explosive matter that touches on judicial integrity, due process, and public confidence in Ghana’s highest court.
“Monstrous lie” or silent confirmation?
The controversy stems from earlier claims by a petitioner, Alfred Ababio Kumi, who wrote to former President John Mahama, requesting the dissolution of the committee investigating the Chief Justice. Kumi alleged that Justice Samuel Kwame Adibu-Asiedu, a member of the investigative committee, had improperly interacted with Thaddeus Sory.
But Tameklo’s decision to circulate a silent video showing Sory greeting three Supreme Court justices—including Adibu-Asiedu—at what appears to be a public restaurant has backfired. The video, intended as a defence, is now being interpreted by many as evidence that contradicts Sory’s earlier denial of the meeting.
The footage shows Sory rising from his table to exchange warm greetings with the justices, including handshakes, hugs, and a bow of respect.
It provides no audio of the interaction, leaving the nature of the conversation and its context entirely to speculation.
On what basis did Tameklo clear the judges?
Tameklo did not stop at sharing the video; he later authored an article insisting that the interaction was “nothing untoward.” However, critics are questioning the foundation of his conclusion, especially as he was not present at the scene and the video lacks sound.
Others noted that the individual who originally petitioned Mahama claimed he was physically present in the restaurant and witnessed the interaction firsthand.
In contrast, Tameklo has not disclosed whether he was present or if he consulted anyone who was.
“Posting a silent video with no additional information and claiming it clears anyone is intellectually dishonest. It undermines public trust in the process.”
Backlash from within the NDC
Significantly, criticism of Tameklo’s actions has come from within his own political party.
Several NDC supporters on social media expressed concern that his post could be interpreted as inadvertently validating the petitioner’s claim that an inappropriate meeting took place.
A judicial ethics question that won’t go away
Beyond political implications, the core issue remains: should a lawyer whose clients are pursuing the removal of a sitting Chief Justice be seen interacting with a Supreme Court Justice who is directly involved in that case?
The video shows Thaddeus Sory engaging with Justice Samuel Kwame Adibu-Asiedu, who sits on the committee investigating the petitions.
He also greets Justices Yoni Kulendi and Henry Anthony Coffie. Even if the interaction was brief and seemingly casual, legal analysts say the optics are damaging.
Calls for judicial council probe intensify
Amid growing unease, some civil society groups and members of the legal community are calling on the Judicial Council to conduct an independent probe into the encounter.
Petition fallout deepens judicial crisis
The broader context of this controversy is the ongoing petition seeking the removal of Chief Justice Torkornoo—a process already fraught with political tension and legal complexity.
The outcome could have significant implications for Ghana’s judiciary and its perceived independence.
Now, with the emergence of this video and the storm surrounding Tameklo’s defense of it, the petition itself risks being overshadowed by controversy over process and propriety.
President Mahama, to whom the petition to dissolve the committee was addressed, has not publicly responded. Meanwhile, pressure is mounting on the Judicial Council, the Bar Association, and civil society organizations to address the implications of the video and restore public confidence.
A cautionary tale in the age of social media
The saga also highlights the perils of public legal commentary in an era where sensitive matters can be inflamed—or distorted—by viral videos.
Tameklo’s decision to post a muted clip, presumably to dispel allegations of wrongdoing, has instead intensified calls for accountability.
Without clear communication from the judiciary or corroborated context from those present at the scene, the incident is likely to remain a source of public suspicion and legal scrutiny.
