Oppong Nkrumah sues Chief Justice over ‘selective justice’ during legal vacation

Member of Parliament Kojo Oppong Nkrumah has initiated legal action against Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie and Attorney-General Dominic Ayine, challenging the constitutionality of administrative warrants issued during the legal vacation period. The case, filed on August 14, 2026, invokes the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction under Articles 2(1) and 130(1) of the 1992 Constitution.

Oppong Nkrumah seeks declarations that the administrative warrants are inconsistent with the Constitution and should be declared null and void. The core of his argument centers around the concept of "selective justice," contending that the warrants prioritize certain criminal cases while neglecting others. According to the MP, this arrangement violates Article 17(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination and promotes equality before the law.

While acknowledging the Chief Justice's constitutional role as head of the Judiciary, Oppong Nkrumah insists that the exercise of administrative powers must adhere to constitutional principles of fairness, reasonableness, transparency, non-arbitrariness, and consistency with the Constitution. The case specifically addresses administrative warrants directing a select few High Court judges to hear criminal cases during the legal vacation, which spans from August 1 to September 30, 2026.

Oppong Nkrumah maintains that these warrants result in a systemic priority for selected criminal cases, leaving other pending criminal matters outside the scope of the arrangement. He argues that this creates an arbitrary distinction between similar criminal proceedings, accused individuals, and litigants. The MP is seeking a Supreme Court determination on whether the Chief Justice acted constitutionally in issuing the warrants and a declaration that the warrants are unconstitutional and void.