Ofoase Ayirebi MP and lawyer Kojo Oppong Nkrumah has filed a case at the Supreme Court challenging the Chief Justice’s decision to allow some criminal cases to be heard during the legal vacation.

A copy of the writ, sighted by GhanaWeb on August 14, 2026, and filed under Articles 2(1) and 130(1) of the 1992 Constitution and Rule 45 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 (C.I. 16), names the Chief Justice and the Attorney General as defendants.

See the full list of 26 judges on vacation duty

Oppong Nkrumah is asking the Supreme Court to declare the directive unconstitutional, arguing that selecting some criminal cases to be heard during the legal vacation amounts to selective justice.

“A declaration that the warrants of the Honourable Chief Justice directing some judges to sit and conduct criminal trials in selected cases during the legal vacation is inconsistent with the letter and spirit of Articles 17(1), 23 and 296(a) and (b) of the Constitution, 1992 and therefore unconstitutional, null and void,” portions of the writ read.

He is also challenging the warrants issued by the Chief Justice directing some judges to sit and conduct criminal trials in selected cases during the vacation.

“A declaration that the warrants of the Honourable Chief Justice directing some judges to sit and conduct criminal trials in selected cases during the legal vacation violate the right to health of members of the Bar and Judicial Service who have been affected by the directive and is inconsistent with Articles 24(1), (2) and 36(10) of the Constitution, 1992 and therefore unconstitutional, null and void,” he stated.

According to the writ, the directive is inconsistent with Articles 17(1), 23, 24(1), (2) and 36(10) of the 1992 Constitution.

The MP is further asking the court to declare that the Chief Justice’s decision to promote and facilitate the hearing of “special criminal cases” during the legal vacation, while other criminal cases are not heard, violates the constitutional principle of equality before the law.

He is also challenging Order 79 Rules 1(1) and 2 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47), to the extent that they allow the Chief Justice to select certain cases for hearing during legal vacations in the same manner as ordinary court sittings.

The writ asks the Supreme Court to declare those provisions unconstitutional, null and void to the extent that they permit such selective hearings.

Oppong Nkrumah has brought the case in three capacities, as a citizen of Ghana, a Member of Parliament and a lawyer.

He is also asking the Supreme Court to issue any further orders or directions it considers appropriate to give effect to the declarations being sought.

“Any other order(s) or directions that this Honourable Court may consider appropriate for giving effect to the declarations and orders so made,” the writ added.

Maurice Ampaw criticises Chief Justice over legal vacation comments

The case comes amid debate over the practice of hearing selected cases during the legal vacation, particularly criminal cases involving politically exposed persons and other high-profile matters.

The plaintiff’s case is that the Chief Justice’s directive to select some criminal cases for hearing during the vacation raises constitutional concerns about equal treatment and the rights of lawyers and judicial officers affected by the arrangement.

Check out the writ below:





MAG/MA

Betty Krosbi Unfiltered: Mahama’s Reset, Politics and the Future of Women’s Football