Private citizen sues A-G, Chief Justice over legal vacation system
At the centre of the case is the question of whether the two-month suspension of sittings by the country’s two highest appellate courts affects the right of citizens to have their cases heard within a reasonable time.
Ghana’s long-standing legal vacation arrangement has been challenged at the Supreme Court by a private citizen, Elorm Kwami Gorni.
Mr Gorni is asking the apex court to determine whether the annual break in sittings of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal from August 1 to September 30 is consistent with the 1992 Constitution.
The suit was filed on July 28, 2026, against Attorney-General Dominic Ayine and Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie.
It invokes the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Articles 2(1) and 130(1) of the Constitution.
At the centre of the case is the question of whether the two-month suspension of sittings by the country’s two highest appellate courts affects the right of citizens to have their cases heard within a reasonable time.
Mr Gorni argues that while the High Court continues to operate during the legal vacation through designated vacation courts, the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal do not sit during the same period.
He says this leaves litigants with pending appeals, constitutional matters and other urgent applications before the appellate courts waiting until the vacation ends.
According to the plaintiff, the arrangement could affect cases involving appeals, applications for stay of execution, interlocutory matters, judicial review proceedings and constitutional claims.
He is seeking a declaration that Rule 61(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1997, C.I. 19, and Rule 82 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996, C.I. 16, are unconstitutional to the extent that they permit the suspension of sittings during the legal vacation.
He contends that the rules, and the way they are implemented, are inconsistent with Articles 19(1), 23, 33, 125 and 296 of the Constitution.
Mr Gorni’s case is not aimed at stopping judges from taking annual leave.
Rather, he wants the Supreme Court to decide whether judicial leave can be organised in a way that does not completely halt the constitutional work of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal for two months.
He argues that fixing court sittings is an administrative function and must therefore be exercised fairly, reasonably and in a manner that protects access to justice.
Among the reliefs he is seeking is an order directing the Chief Justice to consider alternative arrangements for the appellate courts during the vacation period.
These include rotational sittings, vacation panels or staggered judicial leave.
Mr Gorni says such arrangements would allow the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal to continue hearing cases throughout the legal year while still preserving judges’ entitlement to rest.
The suit places Ghana’s legal vacation system before the Supreme Court at a time when the country is already debating whether courts should proceed with cases during the vacation period.
The court is expected to determine whether the existing arrangement is a lawful administrative practice or an unconstitutional barrier to timely justice.
