Lead counsel Samuel Atta Akyea has defended his decision to remain absent from court during Ghana’s ongoing legal vacation. He insists he would rather “die for democracy” than compromise established legal traditions. This position highlights a broader discussion within Ghana’s legal fraternity regarding court operations during designated vacation periods.
Mr. Atta Akyea, a former Attorney-General, clarified that his stance is not an abandonment of his client. Instead, it represents a commitment to principles he deems fundamental to the legal profession and constitutional democracy. He rejected suggestions that his absence indicated a lack of dedication to his client’s case, stating, “I’m not giving up on my client, but I’m upholding principle.”
This situation fits into a larger context of legal debate in Ghana concerning the conduct of substantive criminal trials during legal vacations. The Ghana Bar Association (GBA) has questioned the practice of requiring lawyers to appear for such proceedings. Conversely, the judiciary and government maintain that designated courts possess the authority to hear and determine cases during these periods. This divergence of opinion underscores a tension between legal tradition and judicial efficiency.
Speaking on JoyNews’ Top Story, Mr. Atta Akyea invoked the memory of J.B. Danquah, a member of Ghana’s Big Six who died in prison. He used this historical reference to emphasize the profound importance he places on democratic principles. “J.B. Danquah died in the prisons and not because it was his pleasure, but one-man rule was an aberration,” he noted. He added, “I would prefer to die for democracy than to say that I want my comfort.”
Mr. Atta Akyea dismissed claims that personal convenience motivated his decision. He argued that lawyers bear a significant responsibility to defend the principles underpinning the rule of law. He stated, “We don’t practice convenience in terms of trying to hallow democracy.” He further explained that while lawyers in his firm remained available, none would be used to circumvent what he considers established practice governing legal vacation. He stressed that the issue transcends his personal status as counsel, focusing instead on upholding core principles.
The implications of this debate are significant for Ghana’s legal system and its democratic institutions. Mr. Atta Akyea warned that allowing lawyers to abandon established legal traditions for individual cases could establish a dangerous precedent. He cautioned that a failure by lawyers to defend the rule of law and established legal principles could ultimately weaken the legal profession. This could also undermine Ghana’s democratic institutions, impacting public trust and the integrity of justice.
The ongoing dispute between sections of the legal profession and the judiciary warrants close observation. How this tension resolves will influence future legal practices and the interpretation of judicial authority during vacation periods. It will also shape the balance between individual client representation and the preservation of foundational legal traditions in Ghana.