Why these 2 cases? – Atta Akyea questions Chief Justice’s expedited trial order

Lawyer Samuel Atta Akyea has expressed concern over the Chief Justice's order for expedited trials in two high-profile criminal cases. Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express, Mr Akyea described the directive as indicative of selective justice, questioning why certain murder, manslaughter, and rape cases remain pending while these two cases are being fast-tracked. He argued that several serious criminal cases have gone unaddressed, implying that the expedited process is selective rather than equitable.

Mr Akyea's comments emerged following the decision to prioritize the trial of Kwabena Adu-Boahene, a former National Signals Bureau (NSB) boss, who faces charges linked to financial and other offenses during his time at the NSB. The lawyer questioned the Chief Justice's decision to mandate judges to prioritize selected cases, implying that such a directive could interfere with established court procedures and the availability of lawyers for other professional commitments.

"Part-heard cases should continue, and these are without the reference to the programs of the lawyers," Akyea stated, emphasizing that personal commitments such as medical treatment, professional conferences, or travel should not be overridden.

He was particularly critical of the decision to fast-track what he termed "these two cases," suggesting that their priority is disproportionate. "But these two cases, which a lot of people are talking about, how it is so important to somebody somewhere should be put together, and then the judge should continue," he argued. Akyea maintained that he would not allow the expedited hearing directive to override established legal traditions and statutory provisions.

He insisted that his experience and national security expertise are necessary for the case, noting that national security matters have never been open to public trial since Guggisberg's era.

Akyea rejected the idea that junior lawyers could represent his client, asserting that the nature of the case demands his direct involvement due to its implications for national security. "You think it’s a small case that we are doing-a dangerous president that, because of one man, let’s cancel the whole of the submarine tactics of national security and put national security on trial," he said, emphasizing the unprecedented nature of the case.