A panel of the Supreme Court of Ghana unanimously dismissed a review application filed by Ofoase-Ayirebi MP Kojo Oppong Nkrumah on Wednesday, September 2, 2026, closing off his attempt to overturn an earlier ruling that refused an interlocutory injunction against criminal trials continuing during the legal vacation.
The panel, presided over by Justice Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, dismissed the application as unmeritorious, finding it lacked the exceptional circumstances required to invoke the Court’s limited review jurisdiction.
Full reasons for the decision are scheduled for release on September 7, 2026, while the broader constitutional challenge Oppong Nkrumah has mounted against the Chief Justice’s vacation trial warrants remains pending before the Court on a separate track.
No Adjournment, No Exceptional Circumstances
The panel denied a last-minute adjournment request from Oppong Nkrumah’s counsel, Frank Davies, who had sought more time due to late document service by the Attorney-General’s Department.
Rather than granting the delay, the Court proceeded directly to its ruling. Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai represented the State in opposing the application.
The dismissal follows directly from Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang’s earlier ruling, which denied Oppong Nkrumah’s initial bid for an injunction after finding no sufficient constitutional question to justify halting High Court trials during the vacation period.
Wednesday’s review sought to have that decision revisited, but the panel found nothing in the application meeting the high threshold Ghana’s Supreme Court applies to review requests.
The Underlying Challenge Continues
Hon Oppong Nkrumah’s broader suit, separate from the injunction and review proceedings now concluded, contests the constitutionality of the warrants Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie issued authorising specific High Court judges to conduct criminal trials during the legal vacation.
He argues that the arrangement results in unequal treatment among litigants and breaches constitutional provisions on equal protection under the law. That challenge remains awaiting adjudication regardless of Wednesday’s outcome.
“Uncle GOGO” Weighs In Again
Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, the legal scholar who has corresponded publicly with Oppong Nkrumah throughout the case under the signature “Uncle GOGO,” renewed his commentary following the dismissal. He reminded readers that he had previously warned Oppong Nkrumah of the review route’s likely futility.
“In my last letter, I reminded you that you could seek a review, but warned you about the futility of that course of action. You nevertheless chose to proceed and ignored the advice of your uncle. Perhaps you preferred your lawyers’ professional advice to your uncle’s family advice.”
CDD-Ghana Fellow and legal scholar, Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare
Professor Asare noted that the panel’s unanimous finding confirmed his earlier prediction. “Today, three Justices of the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that you had not shown the special or exceptional circumstances required to invoke the Court’s limited review jurisdiction,” he wrote. “So, Rule 73 has now run its course.“
He was careful to distinguish Wednesday’s outcome from the fate of the underlying constitutional suit, which he said remains unaffected by the review’s dismissal. “The substantive writ remains. As I told you earlier, today’s ruling does not prejudice it.”
His assessment of that separate case, however, remained unchanged from his earlier commentary. “Regrettably, your uncle’s prognosis on that one has not changed either. It looks bleak.” He closed, as in his previous letters, with a reminder of the limits of his own role. “Of course, uncles advise; they do not decide.“
With the review application dismissed and Rule 73 exhausted as a procedural avenue, Oppong Nkrumah’s path forward narrows to the substantive constitutional writ challenging the vacation trial warrants themselves.
The Supreme Court’s full written reasons for Wednesday’s dismissal, due September 7, may offer further clarity on how the Court is likely to approach the larger constitutional questions still before it, even as Asare’s own assessment suggests he does not expect that outcome to favour the MP.
READ ALSO: Burnham Faces Pressure Over Economic Direction at First PMQs
