The Ghana Bar Association (GBA) in a letter has urged the Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie to ensure that judges adhere to the established rules and traditions of Ghana’s legal vacation.
According to the GBA, they are concerned about directives that compel lawyers to appear in court during the vacation period despite indicating their unavailability.
The GBA argued that Counsel are not under any compulsion to appear before a Vacation Court.
They noted that the legal vacation, which runs from August 1 to September 30, is intended to provide judges, lawyers and judicial staff a period of respite following the demanding calendar.
They, however, noted that Vacation Courts may sit to deal with urgent and interlocutory matters during the period.
In a letter to the Chief Justice on Monday, August 10, the GBA stated, “We present to you the compliments of the Ghana Bar Association, especially since this communication is being brought just after the extensive celebrations of the One hundred and Fiftieth anniversary of the Supreme Court Ordinance of 1876. The anniversary was duly marked with the necessary pomp and pageantry, and we congratulate your good self and the entire Judiciary for such a feat.
No sooner had we started settling down in the legal vacation after participating fully in the anniversary celebrations which were from April 16, 2026 to July 31, 2026, were two petitions brought to our notice by Messers Zoe, Akyea & Co, Dame & Partners and Sam Okudzeto & Associates, registering their displeasure with notices served on them by virtue of warrants issued to specific Judges to continue with part-heard criminal cases during the legal vacation
Respectfully, as stipulated in the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, CI 47, specifically Order 79, rule 4, the High Court annually observes three vacations, and per rule 4 (b), the second vacation in the Legal year, which is the longest, is from August 1 to September 30. The reason is not far-fetched, as in the wisdom of the framers of the Rules of Court, Lawyers, judges, and Judicial staff require a deserved period of rest from the rigorous Court Schedule after the 2nd term of the year, which is also the longest term in the legal year.
This notwithstanding, the Judiciary, with the consent of other stakeholders, have b onvention, over the years, agreed to certain courts being designated as Vacation Court- ○ handle any emergencies arising during the vacation, usually interlocutory matters and never trials,
In addition to the in-person Court sittings, we now have Virtual Courts that operate during the vacation with the same scope, which courts also do not conduct trials.
However, the overriding consideration in any matter brought before a Vacation Judge has always been the willingness/availability of Counsel to appear before the Court in an natter slated for conduct during the vacation. In other words, Counsel are not under any compulsion whatsoever to appear before a Vacation Court. Once Counsel in a matte ndicates their unavailability to attend Court during the vacation, even though the Court may have listed their case, it cannot proceed with the case in any way if Counsel or either side or both sides indicate their inability to proceed with the scheduled matter in Court during the vacation.
Innocent parties in a trial, civil or criminal, ought not be coerced by a Judge to represent themselves, as the absence of a Lawyer is not considered willful during a Legal Vacation. No step whatsoever ought to be taken in the matter by the Judge, apart from adjourning the case to the dates proposed by Counsel.
It is in respect of this time-honoured tradition that we write, as any attempt to do otherwise, with or without a warrant, will smack of bias or selective justice. Lawyers have had to bend over backwards to extend their office hours, especially when this very term saw the introduction of Afternoon Court Sittings under the new scheme. Vacations, per the Rules of Court, ought to be observed as such. Already, it has been brought to our attention that quite a number of Lawyers have written submissions to produce during the Legal Vacation while others are already scheduled to be in other jurisdictions, attending to other equally important matters and pre-scheduled conferences. Some law firms are even closed for the entire period of the legal vacation.
Respectfully, My Lord, the Lawyers are personally responsible for their well-being and the right to maintain a healthy work-life balance. Duly earned vacations must therefore not be tampered with.
The Ghana Bar Association has always cooperated with the Judiciary to ensure the smooth and speedy delivery of justice and trust that on this occasion, the Judiciary in like manner would abide by the Rules of Court and the entrenched, sacred and treasured traditions relating to legal vacations.
In light of the above, we are confident that the said petitions will be considered favourably”.
The GBA statement follows, Lawyers representing Abdul-Hanan Wahab and former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene, Godfred Dame and Atta Akyea, have filed a separate petition to the Chief Justice, protesting the decision to allow their criminal trials to proceed during the judicial legal vacation.
Former Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame for Abdul-Hanan Wahab and Samuel Atta Akyea for Kwabena Adu-Boahene are the two legal teams that contend that commencing the trials during the vacation is inconsistent.
According to the two legal teams, the trial of criminal cases involving NPP people during the vacation is unprecedented and discriminatory.
The two legal teams’ objection follows a ruling by Justice Francis Achibonga, who adjourned the separate cases to August 11 and 12 after receiving authorisation from the Chief Justice to sit during the vacation period.
See the statement below:
@ghnow_ “I take all the blame, I am sorry for this disgrace to my father”- Akofena Speaks #GHNow #fyp ♬ original sound – GHnow
@ghnow_ There are issues in every family, I call my sister (Adwoa Safo) “Sokode” – Akofenya speaks #GHNow #fyp ♬ original sound – GHnow
