Oppong Nkrumah challenges Chief Justice’s legal vacation directives at Supreme Court

Ghanaian Member of Parliament Kojo Oppong Nkrumah has taken the Supreme Court to court, challenging the Chief Justice's recent directives regarding judicial duties during the legal vacation period. In a legal challenge, Nkrumah seeks a declaration that the Chief Justice's orders are unconstitutional. His arguments revolve around the inconsistency of the directives with certain constitutional articles and the High Court Rules.

Nkrumah's writ alleges that the Chief Justice's decision to permit some criminal cases to be heard during the legal vacation, while others are not afforded the same opportunity, constitutes selective justice. He further contends that this decision violates the right to health of affected legal professionals, in line with specific constitutional provisions.

The Ofoase-Ayirebi MP is also challenging the health-related decision on the grounds that it conflicts with Articles 24(1) and (2), and 36(10) of the Constitution. Additionally, Nkrumah is requesting the Supreme Court to declare certain orders and rules, including Order 79 Rules 1(1) and 2 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, unconstitutional. These rules permit the Chief Justice to choose cases for hearing during legal vacations, similar to regular court proceedings.

As the plaintiff, Nkrumah represents himself as a Ghanaian citizen, Member of Parliament, and lawyer. The defendants named in the writ are the Chief Justice of Ghana and the Attorney-General. The plaintiffs have been given 14 days to submit their statements of case after being served with the plaintiff's statement of case.