Oppong Nkrumah Down Flat at Supreme Court, Injunction Application On Vacation Trials Thrown Out

• The Supreme Court dismissed MP Kojo Oppong Nkrumah's application to halt proceedings challenging warrants issued by the Chief Justice to High Court judges
• Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang ruled that Oppong Nkrumah failed to establish a sufficiently strong case to justify blocking the Chief Justice's constitutional powers
• The court rejected the applicant's discrimination argument under Article 17, finding no evidence the Chief Justice applied the law differently to any persons

Ghana's Supreme Court has dismissed an injunction application filed by Ofoase Ayeribi Member of Parliament Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, which sought to suspend legal vacation court proceedings pending the final determination of a case challenging the constitutionality of warrants issued by the Chief Justice.

The warrants in question authorised certain High Court judges to conduct criminal trials during the legal vacation period.

Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, presiding as a sole judge, held that Oppong Nkrumah had not established a sufficiently strong case to justify restraining the Chief Justice from exercising his constitutional and administrative powers.

Read also

Cheddar scores major legal victory in hotel takeover case as court issues new order

The court also addressed the question of legal representation, explaining that the Attorney-General was properly entitled to represent the Chief Justice in the proceedings.

It referenced a previous ruling in the Republic versus Tsatsu Tsikata, in which the Supreme Court established that the Chief Justice, as a public official, could be represented by the Attorney-General in proceedings brought against him.

Discrimination Argument Rejected

A central plank of Oppong Nkrumah's application rested on the claim that assigning criminal cases to judges during the legal vacation violated the constitutional guarantee of equality and non-discrimination under Article 17 of Ghana's Constitution.

The court dismissed that argument. Justice Pwamang found no evidence that the Chief Justice had directed that the law be applied differently to any particular persons appearing before the courts.

The court also noted that the applicant himself had conceded that the Chief Justice holds the discretion to issue such warrants.

"I am unable to see how the directive assigning cases to be heard during the legal vacation can be said to be discriminatory," Justice Pwamang held.

Read also

Akosua Serwaa sues Abusuapanin Tupac over defamatory claims about her marriage to Daddy Lumba

The court further observed that the warrants were clear on their face, indicating that judges were expected to handle cases already pending before their respective courts.

Oppong Nkrumah had also not alleged that the Chief Justice's decision was motivated by any constitutionally prohibited characteristic, such as the colour, gender, or religion of accused persons or witnesses.

Justice Pwamang described the warrants as part of a broader effort to create opportunities for criminal cases to be heard and resolved more quickly, stressing that the administration of justice was not confined to periods outside the legal vacation.

With the injunction dismissed, the substantive constitutional challenge to the Chief Justice's warrants will continue as a separate matter before the court.

Source: YEN.com.gh