Why this selective justice? – Atta Akyea questions Chief Justice over hearing of cases amidst legal vacation

Lawyer Samuel Atta Akyea expressed his concerns over the Chief Justice's directive for expedited hearings of certain high-profile criminal cases, calling it "selective justice." Akyea questioned why this decision was being made, given that numerous other serious criminal cases remain pending. He highlighted the fact that cases of murder, manslaughter, rape, and other criminal offenses are not being addressed adequately, implying that justice is not being served uniformly.

The lawyer challenged the rationale behind the Chief Justice's decision to prioritize specific cases over others, particularly those involving the National Signals Bureau (NSB) boss Kwabena Adu-Boahene. Akyea argued that such a directive could disrupt established court procedures and the availability of lawyers, as they may have other professional commitments.

He stated that part-heard cases should continue, and that these should not be affected by considerations such as the legal status of the lawyers, whether they are abroad for medical treatment or attending professional conferences. The lawyer was particularly critical of the decision to fast-track the cases involving Adu-Boahene.

He maintained that he would not allow the expedited hearing directive to override established legal traditions and statutory provisions. Akyea insisted that his experience was necessary due to the nature of the case and the national security implications it carries. He pointed out that national security matters have never been the subject of open trials since the Guggisberg era in Ghana.

He stressed that the case presented an unprecedented challenge due to its implications for national security, and that he could not refer it to a junior lawyer who might not be equipped to handle such a high-stakes case.