Supreme Court to Rule on Injunction Against High Court Vacation Trials

The Supreme Court is expected to rule today on an application challenging the constitutionality of High Court criminal trials conducted during the legal vacation. Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang will decide on a request to restrain the High Court from proceeding with these selected trials.

The application was initiated by Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, the Member of Parliament for Ofoase-Ayirebi, who argues that administrative warrants issued by the Chief Justice, directing specific judges to conduct criminal proceedings during the vacation, are unconstitutional. The core of his argument questions the separation of powers, particularly concerning the legal representation provided.

“

The Chief Justice heads an independent organ of the state, the Judiciary. We have the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive. They are supposed to be independent organs of the state.

Nkrumah's counsel, Frank Davies, contended that the Chief Justice, as a substantive defendant, should have separate legal representation. He raised concerns about the Attorney-General, an executive branch official, representing the head of the Judiciary, arguing it blurs the lines between independent state organs.

Conversely, the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Edem Srem-Sai, argued that no conflict of interest exists. He maintained that the Chief Justice, in his administrative capacity, is appropriately represented by the Attorney-General, and this representation does not diminish the Attorney-General's own standing as a defendant. The court must now weigh these arguments to determine if there is a serious question of constitutionality to be tried and where the balance of convenience lies.

“

There was no conflict in the Chief Justice being represented by the Attorney-General. He maintained that no such conflict had been demonstrated and that the Chief Justice, as the administrative head of the Judiciary, was properly represented by the Attorney-General.