The Ghana Bar Association (GBA) has petitioned the Chief Justice, Justice Paul Baffoe Bonnie, to intervene over the hearing of criminal cases by some judges during the ongoing legal vacation.
In a letter signed by the GBA National President, Mrs. Efua Ghartey, the Association urged the Judiciary to respect the rules and longstanding conventions governing the legal vacation.
The petition follows complaints submitted by three law firms shortly after the commencement of the vacation period on August 1. The firms, Zoe, Akyea & Co., Dame & Partners, and Sam Okudzeto & Associates, reportedly raised concerns about certain judges proceeding with part-heard criminal cases during the vacation.
The GBA acknowledged the importance of preventing delays in the administration of justice but argued that the legal vacation remains an important component of the justice system and should be observed in accordance with the Rules of Court.
GBA Cites Rules Governing Legal Vacation
The Association relied on Order 79, Rule 4 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, C.I. 47, which provides for three legal vacations each year. According to the GBA, the second vacation, which is the longest, runs from August 1 to September 30.
The Association said the vacation was established to provide judges, lawyers and judicial staff with an opportunity to rest following the demanding second term of the legal year. “Judges, Lawyers and Judicial staff require a deserved period of rest from the rigorous Court Schedule after the 2nd term of the year,” the Association stated.
The GBA argued that preserving the vacation is important not only for the wellbeing of legal professionals but also for maintaining the quality and effectiveness of justice delivery.
Vacation Courts Limited to Urgent Matters
The GBA acknowledged that the Judiciary has, over the years and with stakeholder agreement, designated certain courts as Vacation Courts to deal with urgent matters during the recess.
According to the Association, such courts are generally mandated to handle interlocutory applications, bail applications and other urgent matters. It maintained that full trials are not ordinarily intended to be conducted during the legal vacation.
The Association also referred to Virtual Courts, which continue to operate during the vacation but are similarly restricted to urgent matters rather than full trials.
Counsel’s Availability Must Be Respected
A central concern raised by the GBA is the availability of counsel during the vacation period. The Association maintained that lawyers are not compelled to appear before a Vacation Court when they have indicated that they are unavailable.
It argued that where counsel for either party is unavailable, the judge should adjourn the matter to dates proposed by the relevant counsel rather than proceed with the case. “In other words, Counsel are not under any compulsion whatsoever to appear before a Vacation Court,” the GBA stated.
The Association said the principle should apply whether one or both sides indicate their inability to proceed during the vacation. It further cautioned that litigants without legal representation should not be pressured into representing themselves simply because their lawyers are unavailable during the vacation.
According to the GBA, the absence of counsel during the legal vacation should not be treated as wilful non-attendance, and the appropriate response should be an adjournment.
GBA Raises Lawyer Wellbeing Concerns
The petition also focused on the growing workload and wellbeing of lawyers. The GBA said lawyers have a responsibility to maintain a healthy work-life balance and should be allowed to make reasonable use of the legally recognised vacation period.
The Association cited the introduction of afternoon court sittings during the previous legal term, which it said had already required lawyers and law firms to extend their working hours to accommodate the additional schedules.
It added that several lawyers have already made commitments for the vacation period, including filing submissions in other jurisdictions and attending previously scheduled conferences. Some law firms, the Association noted, have also planned to close during the legal vacation.
“Respectfully, My Lord, the Lawyers are personally responsible for their well-being, and they have to maintain a healthy work-life balance. Duly earned vacations must therefore not be tampered with”.
Efua Gharttey, GBA President
GBA Warns Against Forced Attendance
The Association warned that compelling lawyers to appear before courts during the vacation despite their stated unavailability could raise concerns about fairness and selective application of judicial procedures.
It argued that the legal profession’s ability to function effectively depends partly on ensuring that lawyers have adequate opportunities for rest and professional preparation. The GBA nevertheless reaffirmed its commitment to cooperating with the Judiciary to ensure the efficient and timely administration of justice.
It said the Association has consistently worked with the courts and expressed confidence that the Judiciary would similarly respect the Rules of Court and established traditions governing legal vacations. “In light of the above, we are confident that the said petitions will be considered favourably,” the Association stated.
Chief Justice Expected to Provide Direction
The petition places before the Chief Justice the competing considerations of reducing case backlogs and preserving the established framework for legal vacations. The GBA maintains that while urgent matters must continue to receive attention, full trials and other non-urgent proceedings should not undermine the purpose of the vacation period.
The Association’s intervention has also raised broader concerns about lawyer wellbeing, workload management and the potential impact of excessive court demands on the quality of legal representation.
The Chief Justice is now expected to consider the petitions and provide direction on how Vacation Courts should operate for the remainder of the August 1 to September 30 vacation period.
The legal community will be watching for clarification on whether the traditional vacation framework will be maintained or whether further exceptions will be permitted for ongoing criminal proceedings.
READ ALSO: Burnham Orders Review to Keep Harper’s Killers Behind Bars
