Lawyers challenge vacation hearings in Abdul-Wahab, Adu-Boahen cases
Lawyers for Hanan Abdul-Wahab and Kwabena Adu-Boahen have petitioned the Chief Justice to reverse a decision allowing their clients' criminal trials to proceed during the judicial vacation, arguing that the move is unconstitutional and inconsistent with long-standing court practice.
The petitions follow a decision by Justice Francis Achibonga to adjourn the two separate criminal cases to August 11 and 12, 2026, after receiving warrants from the Chief Justice authorising him to sit during the legal vacation.
In separate letters, former Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame, counsel for Hanan Abdul-Wahab, and Samuel Atta Akyea, lawyer for Kwabena Adu-Boahen, contend that High Court judges sitting during the vacation are traditionally limited to hearing motions rather than conducting substantive criminal trials.
Mr Dame argued that the directive departs from established judicial practice, stressing that vacation courts are intended to deal only with motions.
“A Justice of the High Court may be permitted to sit and hear only motions in the legal vacation. In accordance with this practice, vacation courts are held throughout the country for motions only,” he stated.
He further noted that even in civil cases, substantive hearings are generally not conducted during the vacation unless all parties consent.
“The warrant for Justice Achibonga to commence the hearing of the instant criminal matter, without the consent of the parties in the matter, is thus most irregular and contrary to law,” Mr Dame argued.
The lawyers also maintained that the decision infringes on their clients' constitutional right to legal representation of their choice, explaining that members of their legal teams had already made personal and professional commitments during the court recess.
Mr Atta Akyea said compelling lawyers to appear during the vacation would disrupt planned engagements after a demanding legal year.
“Regrettably, Your Lordship, we are unable to attend the said sittings during the legal vacation as this direction will necessitate the lawyers of the accused persons in this matter to work beyond the legal year and during the legal vacation, while other lawyers rest,” he wrote.
He added that the directive would also interfere with travel plans and other obligations of lawyers at his firm.
“We of Zoe, Akyea & Co. have worked tirelessly throughout the legal year from October 2025 to July 2026, representing clients across the various regions of Ghana,” Mr Atta Akyea stated.
The petitions further question the decision to select only a handful of criminal cases for hearing during the vacation, warning that such a practice could create the impression of unequal treatment before the law.
Mr Dame cautioned that hearing only a few selected criminal matters during the court break could expose the judiciary to allegations of discrimination.
“The handpicking of a few criminal cases from among the many hundreds of criminal cases around the Greater Accra Region for hearing during the vacation is unprecedented and may hint at discriminatory treatment,” he stated.
He added that the move could “unnecessarily expose Your Lordship to accusations of unfair and discriminatory treatment.”
The lawyers have therefore urged the Chief Justice to review the warrants authorising the vacation sittings and suspend the scheduled proceedings.