GBA’s position on lawyers’ appearance before vacation Courts has ‘no legal basis’ – Deputy AG

Justice Srem-Sai, the Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, has dismissed the Ghana Bar Association's (GBA) stance on lawyers' participation in hearings before Vacation Courts during the legal vacation period. He stated that the GBA's position lacks any legal foundation, arguing that it is unsupported by existing laws, facts, reason, or established court practices.

The GBA's concerns stem from directives requiring lawyers to appear before judges sitting during the current legal vacation period, which they argue infringe upon their professional discretion. Justice Srem-Sai clarified that the controversy is unfounded, as Vacation Courts are routinely in session during legal vacations, and there is no dispute regarding this fact.

The dispute arose after the GBA, through a letter signed by its President Efua Ghartey and National Secretary Kwaku Gyau Baffour, raised concerns over directives issued to law firms requiring them to appear before judges during the legal vacation. The GBA cited Order 79, Rule 4 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, and Order 79, Rule 47 (CI 47), which stipulate the occurrence of three annual legal vacations, including the one from August 1 to September 30.

The association contends that Vacation Courts typically handle emergencies and interlocutory matters, not trials, and that the willingness and availability of counsel should influence whether proceedings should proceed during the vacation. However, Justice Srem-Sai disagreed, asserting that the Chief Justice has issued warrants allowing roughly a dozen judges nationwide to sit during the legal vacation and hear pending cases.

These judges maintain the authority to administer and hear cases during the vacation period. Justice Srem-Sai emphasized that the idea that lawyers dictate whether cases should be tried during the vacation period lacks any basis in fact, law, reason, or court practice. He warned that accepting the GBA's interpretation could lead to significant delays in justice administration, as vacation judges would take leave after the vacation, potentially delaying trials until January 2027.

He rejected the GBA's claim of a convention limiting proceedings during the legal vacation, stating that such a convention does not exist. Instead, he pointed to Order 79 of CI 47, which explicitly allows for legal vacations. The Deputy Attorney-General warned that lawyers who refuse to appear before Vacation Courts could cause their clients significant issues.

He explained that judges with vacation court authority retain the right to proceed with cases even if counsel does not appear. If a lawyer fails to attend a subsequent adjourned date, the court could require the client to proceed without legal representation.