Why ORAL cases? – Former Deputy AG quizzes over seeming selectivity in legal vacation hearings

Former Deputy Attorney General Alfred Tuah-Yeboah has raised concerns over the selective nature of substantive legal hearings during the country's legal vacation. His comments follow a directive from Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie to continue high-profile criminal cases during the break. Tuah-Yeboah questioned why lawyers were not adequately consulted in decisions about which cases should proceed.

He argued that lawyers and judges typically suspend substantive hearings during the vacation, except in exceptional circumstances. Tuah-Yeboah cited situations where continuing a case during the vacation, such as a very sick witness, could be justified. However, he questioned why similar consideration could not be extended to thousands of other pending cases, particularly civil matters involving injunctions over properties.

These cases may face prolonged delays after the vacation. The former Deputy AG also cautioned against accepting the current arrangement without considering potential future implications for legal practice. He noted that he had never been required to appear in court to defend clients during the vacation, highlighting that this practice had never been imposed on him in his 24-year career.

Tuah-Yeboah argued that if substantive hearings are to be introduced during the vacation, they should be applied consistently across the judiciary. He challenged authorities to verify whether all judges with warrants will indeed conduct substantive hearings, expressing concerns about the selectivity that has emerged, with only two specialized courts expected to handle such matters during the vacation.