Former Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame has criticised the decision to hear proceedings involving former National Food Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO) Chief Executive Officer Hanan Abdul-Hamid during the legal vacation. Mr. Dame argued there was no urgency to justify the court's action. He maintained that compelling parties to participate in a trial during the legal vacation goes against long-standing judicial practice.
Mr. Dame, representing Abdul-Hamid, questioned the basis for the court's decision. He stated there was no emergency requiring the matter to be heard during the vacation period. He explained that throughout his legal career, courts sat during vacation only for urgent election-related matters. He recalled a 2012 Electoral Commission case where the Supreme Court heard an application for an interlocutory injunction due to the proximity of a general election. However, the substantive case was adjourned until October.
This situation fits into a broader Ghanaian legal and political narrative concerning judicial processes and fairness. The judiciary's legal vacation is a long-established tradition, ensuring judges and legal practitioners have a period of rest. Deviations from this practice, especially for substantive criminal trials, often spark debate. Such debates touch on the rule of law and the consistent application of legal principles across all cases. The public's confidence in the justice system relies heavily on perceived fairness and adherence to established norms.
Mr. Dame further argued that applications for a stay of proceedings are neither unusual nor unprecedented. He cited previous cases, including matters involving the National Communications Authority, where courts suspended proceedings. He also criticised the decision to schedule the hearing without the consent of the parties involved. Mr. Dame maintained that even during his tenure as Attorney General, he followed established procedures. He would formally petition the courts rather than seek to have matters scheduled during the legal vacation without consulting the parties involved.
The former Attorney General described the decision to proceed with the case during the legal vacation as inappropriate. He argued that it had created unnecessary controversy. He stressed that judicial traditions and established conventions should be upheld to ensure fairness. He stated, "It cannot be that there can be one set of rules for one set of people and another set of rules for a different set of people." This highlights concerns about potential selective justice or preferential treatment in legal proceedings.
This development comes as the Accra High Court has suspended proceedings in the criminal trial of Hanan Abdul-Wahab and his wife, Faiza Seidu Wuni. This suspension awaits the determination of an injunction application before the Supreme Court. The application challenges the conduct of trials during the legal vacation. Defence counsel for both Hanan Abdul-Wahab and Kwabena Adu-Boahene had petitioned Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie. They argued that the directive allowing selected criminal trials during vacation departs from established court practice. They also contend it is inconsistent with the Constitution. The lawyers maintain that High Court judges permitted to sit during vacation traditionally handle only motions and interlocutory matters, not substantive criminal trials. This ongoing legal challenge underscores the significant implications for judicial administration and the rights of defendants in Ghana.