Supreme Court explains dismissal of Oppong Nkrumah’s bid to halt legal vacation trials
The Supreme Court has released its full reasoning for dismissing an interlocutory injunction application filed by Ofoase-Ayirebi Member of Parliament, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, seeking to suspend criminal proceedings being conducted by some High Court judges during the legal vacation.
Justice G. Pwamang, sitting as a single justice of the Supreme Court, held that Mr Oppong Nkrumah had failed to establish a serious constitutional issue that warranted an injunction against the Chief Justice.
The MP is challenging the constitutionality of warrants issued by the Chief Justice permitting selected High Court judges to sit and conduct criminal proceedings during the legal vacation.
In his substantive case, Mr Oppong Nkrumah is asking the Supreme Court to declare the warrants unconstitutional, arguing that they violate constitutional protections relating to equality, non-discrimination, workers’ rights and the proper exercise of discretionary powers.
He has also argued that the directive results in selective justice by allowing certain criminal cases to proceed while others remain on hold during the legal vacation.
Justice Pwamang, however, rejected the claim that the warrants amounted to discrimination under Article 17 of the 1992 Constitution.
According to the court, the warrants did not instruct judges to hear only “selected cases”. Rather, they authorised the judges concerned to conduct hearings in all cases pending before their respective courts.
The court further noted that Article 17(2) prohibits discrimination on specific grounds, including gender, race, colour, ethnic origin, religion, creed, social or economic status.
Justice Pwamang said Mr Oppong Nkrumah had not alleged that the Chief Justice’s decision to select the two courts for the issuance of warrants was influenced by any of those constitutionally prohibited grounds.
“The plaintiff in his statement of case has not alleged that the Chief Justice’s conduct in selecting the two Courts to give warrants to conduct hearings in the legal vacation was influenced by the gender, race, colour, ethnic origin, religion, creed or social or economic standing of the accused persons in those cases or their witnesses,” he said.
The ruling clears the way for the affected High Court judges to continue conducting proceedings during the legal vacation, while Mr Oppong Nkrumah’s substantive constitutional challenge remains before the Supreme Court.