Deputy Attorney-General Challenges GBA Position on Lawyers’ Appearance Before Vacation Courts
Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai has challenged claims by the President of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA), Efua Ghartey, that lawyers cannot be compelled to appear before Vacation Courts once they have indicated their unavailability.
In a response to the GBA President’s letter to Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, Dr Srem-Sai disputed the GBA’s position that Vacation Courts traditionally do not conduct trials during the legal vacation, arguing that both positions are unsupported by law, rules or established practice.
The GBA in its letter had urged the Chief Justice to ensure that judges adhere to the established rules and traditions governing the legal vacation.
The association had also raised concerns over directives requiring lawyers to appear before judges during the vacation period despite notifying the courts that they would be unavailable. The GBA said the legal vacation, which runs from August 1 to September 30, is intended to provide judges, lawyers and judicial staff with a period of respite following the demanding court calendar.
The position followed complaints from three law firms, including Messrs Zoe, Akyea, lawyers for former National Signals Bureau boss Adu Boahen, over notices directing their lawyers to appear before judges to continue hearing part-heard criminal cases during the legal vacation.
However, Dr Srem-Sai has rejected the GBA President’s position, arguing that the authority to determine whether proceedings should continue during the legal vacation rests with the bench and not the lawyers. He said a lawyer’s primary duty is to their client, and allowing lawyers to determine whether proceedings should take place could undermine the court’s responsibility to balance the interests of litigants.
“A lawyer’s primary duty is, in fact, to his client – not to the client of another lawyer,” he stated.
Dr Srem-Sai also challenged the GBA’s assertion that Vacation Courts “never” conduct trials. According to him, while the superior courts significantly scale down their workload during the legal vacation, they do not shut down. Selected judges are authorised to sit as Vacation Judges, with the authority to handle both interlocutory and substantive proceedings in cases originating from their own courts.
“Contrary to the GBA President’s claim, vacation Judges take proceedings on the substance of the case and do conduct trials during the legal vacation,” he stated.
He explained that a Vacation Judge handling cases from another judge who is on vacation may only take interlocutory proceedings, since substantive proceedings must ultimately be determined by the judge with responsibility for the case.
Dr Srem-Sai further argued that the Chief Justice, as the administrative head of the Judiciary, has the authority to determine which judges sit during the legal vacation. He said lawyers who require a break during the period may ask the judge handling their case for accommodation, including an adjournment, but such a request remains subject to the judge’s discretion.
He maintained that lawyers cannot unilaterally declare beforehand that they will not attend proceedings during the legal vacation. Dr Srem-Sai warned that the GBA President’s position could have serious implications for the administration of justice if it effectively transfers the power to manage and control court proceedings from judges to lawyers.
“What the GBA President’s proposition in her letter to the honourable Chief Justice seeks to do is grave. It seeks to move the power to manage and control court proceedings and to do justice from the hands of the Judge into the hands of a lawyer,” he said.
