Private citizen challenges legal vacation of superior courts at Supreme Court

A private citizen, Elorm Kwami Gorni, has filed a case at the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of Ghana’s legal vacation for the Superior Courts.

Mr Gorni has invoked the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, asking it to declare the annual suspension of sittings by the Superior Courts unconstitutional.

The Superior Courts comprise the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.

In a writ filed on Friday, August 7, 2026, with the Attorney-General and Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie named as defendants, Mr Gorni is seeking a declaration that the complete suspension of sittings during the legal vacation is inconsistent with Articles 1(2), 19(1), 23, 33, 125 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution.

He is asking the Supreme Court to declare the practice null, void and of no effect.

Mr Gorni is also seeking an order directing the Chief Justice to introduce administrative arrangements, including rotational vacation sittings, to ensure that the Superior Courts continue hearing and determining cases throughout the year.

As part of his reliefs, he wants the Supreme Court to strike down Rule 61(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1997 (C.I. 19), and Rule 82 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 (C.I. 16), to the extent that they permit the two courts to suspend sittings from August 1 to September 30 each year.

Constitutional argument

Mr Gorni argues that the suspension of court sittings during the two-month period denies litigants their constitutional right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time.

He contends that the practice also amounts to unfair administrative action and effectively makes the constitutional right of appeal unavailable for a continuous period of two months every year.

According to him, the legal vacation is neither necessary nor proportionate because alternative arrangements could allow judges and judicial staff to take leave without bringing the hearing of cases to a complete halt.

He cited measures such as rotational sittings, staggered judicial leave and specially constituted vacation panels as possible alternatives.

Mr Gorni further argues that the increased number of Justices serving on the Superior Courts makes it possible to adopt such arrangements while ensuring that the courts remain operational throughout the year.

The case comes amid renewed debate over the purpose and administration of the legal vacation, particularly following disagreements between sections of the legal profession and the Judiciary over the scheduling of cases during the current vacation period.