Lawyers cannot decide if vacation cases proceed — Srem-Sai replies GBA

Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai has rejected the Ghana Bar Association’s position that lawyers cannot be compelled to appear before Vacation Courts once they have indicated that they are unavailable.

He says the decision on whether a case proceeds during the legal vacation belongs to the court, not counsel.

Dr Srem-Sai was responding to a letter written by GBA President Efua Ghartey to Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie over the scheduling of cases during the legal vacation.

The GBA had urged the Chief Justice to ensure that judges comply with what it described as the rules and traditions governing vacation sittings.

The Association argued that the legal vacation, which runs from August 1 to September 30, is meant to give judges, lawyers and judicial staff a period of rest after a demanding court calendar.

It also said trials are traditionally not conducted by Vacation Courts.

But Dr Srem-Sai disagreed, describing both positions as unsupported by law, court rules or established judicial practice.

According to him, the courts reduce their workload during the legal vacation, but they do not shut down.

He said selected judges are authorised to sit as Vacation Judges and may handle proceedings, including substantive matters, depending on the nature of the case before them.

“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.

Dr Srem-Sai explained that where a Vacation Judge is dealing with a matter assigned to another judge who is on vacation, the judge may be limited to interlocutory proceedings.

However, where the case is properly before the Vacation Judge, he said there is no legal rule preventing substantive proceedings or trials from taking place.

The Deputy Attorney-General also said lawyers cannot unilaterally announce in advance that they will not attend court during the vacation period.

He argued that a lawyer’s duty is first to the client and that allowing counsel to decide whether proceedings can continue would undermine the court’s control over its own process.

“A lawyer’s primary duty is, in fact, to his client — not to the client of another lawyer,” he said.

Dr Srem-Sai said lawyers who need a break or have genuine scheduling difficulties may apply to the judge handling the case for an adjournment or other accommodation.

He stressed, however, that such requests are subject to the judge’s discretion.

He also maintained that the Chief Justice, as administrative head of the Judiciary, has authority to determine which judges sit during the legal vacation.

The controversy follows complaints from three law firms, including Zoe, Akyea & Co., lawyers for former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene.

The firms had raised concerns about notices directing lawyers to appear before judges to continue part-heard criminal cases during the vacation period.

Dr Srem-Sai warned that the GBA President’s argument could have serious consequences for justice delivery if accepted.

“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.

He maintained that while lawyers may seek reasonable accommodation from the court, they cannot decide on their own that a scheduled vacation sitting should not proceed.