Ghana Judges Hear Substantive Cases During Legal Vacation

• Judges can hear substantive cases during legal vacation if lawyers have no objection.
• The practice of having judges sit during legal vacation predates Ghana's independence and is intended to address urgent matters.
• Lawyers involved in substantive cases should be consulted before proceedings are scheduled during the legal vacation, as per established practice.

When a judge intends to hear a substantive matter during their vacation, they are required to consult with the lawyers involved in the case. If the lawyers have no objection, a warrant is secured, and the matter can be heard during the legal vacation.

Ghana's legal system has a long history of allowing judges to hear urgent matters during their vacation, dating back before the country's independence. This practice is intended to address pressing issues that require immediate attention, such as bail applications and injunctions. However, substantive trials involving the taking of evidence and cross-examination of witnesses have traditionally been handled by regular judges, not those on vacation. The distinction between urgent matters and substantive cases is crucial in understanding the current controversy surrounding the decision to allow selected cases to proceed during the legal vacation.

When a judge intends to hear a substantive matter during their vacation, they are required to consult with the lawyers involved in the case. If the lawyers have no objection, a warrant is secured, and the matter can be heard during the legal vacation. This established procedure ensures that all parties are aware of and agree to the proceedings taking place outside of regular court hours. The absence of consultation with lawyers has been identified as the key concern in the current controversy surrounding the Kwabena Adu-Boahen and Hanan Abdul-Wahab cases.

Lawyers involved in substantive cases should be consulted before proceedings are scheduled during the legal vacation, as per established practice. This is not a matter of challenging the authority of the Chief Justice to authorise judges to sit during the legal vacation but rather ensuring that all parties are aware and agree to the proceedings taking place outside of regular court hours. The participation and consent of counsel involved form part of the established practice for such hearings, which has been overlooked in the current controversy.

Lawyers involved in substantive cases should be consulted before proceedings are scheduled during the legal vacation, as per established practice.

Source: Original reporting via Tuah-Yeboah