Justice Nii Ayikoi Otto’s Take
Chief Justice travel expenses : Former AG Nii Ayikoi Otoo defends the Chief Justice, clarifying that institutional auditors, not the judiciary head, handle travel expense approvals and irregularities.
Former Attorney General Defends Chief Justice Over Travel Expense Controversy
In a striking defense of judicial integrity, former Attorney General Nii Ayikoi Otoo has publicly addressed the recent controversy surrounding the Chief Justice’s travel expenses. He provided a crucial clarification on proper governmental procedures.
Importantly, he stated that the Chief Justice does not personally determine travel expenses; instead, they are approved by the broader institution. Consequently, he argued that any financial irregularities should be rightfully handled by official auditors through a surcharge process. He therefore emphasized that these matters are not a valid excuse for accusations of wrongdoing or plots for her removal.
This statement, issued on September 2nd, 2025, serves as a significant intervention. It aims to quell growing speculation and potential misinformation surrounding the administration of the judiciary.
Clarifying the Chain of Command for Expenses
Firstly, Justice Otoo’s statement draws a clear line regarding financial authority. The Chief Justice, while leading the judiciary, does not operate as a sole administrator. Instead, travel expenses and related reimbursements fall under a structured institutional framework. Therefore, the approval process involves dedicated administrative departments and committees within the judicial service. This distinction is vital because it prevents the unjust attribution of institutional administrative actions to a single individual.
The Proper Procedure for Addressing Irregularities
Moreover, the former Attorney General precisely outlined the constitutionally mandated path for addressing any suspected financial discrepancies. Rather than launching public accusations or political attacks, the correct channel is through auditing bodies.
For instance, if auditors discover any irregularity in claims or approvals, their tool is a surcharge. This process is a standard, non-political mechanism for recovering public funds. Thus, bypassing this official channel in favor of public speculation undermines both due process and the principles of natural justice.
A Defense Against Political Motivations
Ultimately, Justice Otoo’s comments suggest a concern over the motivations behind the accusations. By highlighting that audit irregularities are “not an excuse to accuse her of wrongdoing or plot her removal,” he implies that the issue is being weaponized. This perspective raises critical questions about whether the controversy stems from a genuine concern for fiscal responsibility or from a political strategy to undermine the leadership of the judiciary.
In conclusion, this defense from a respected legal figure reinforces the importance of established procedures. It serves as a reminder that institutions, not individuals, are the foundation of democratic governance. For the public, understanding this distinction is key to holding power accountable without resorting to unfounded attacks that can erode trust in essential democratic pillars.
This article is based on a public statement from former Attorney General Nii Ayikoi Otoo. For further updates on this developing story, follow reliable news sources.
Credit : Ghana Today
