Oppong Nkrumah fights on: Supreme Court review bid targets legal vacation trials
Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, the Member of Parliament for Ofoase Ayirebi, is not backing down. On Monday, August 24, 2026, his lawyers filed a fresh motion asking the Supreme Court to review its earlier decision that allowed selected High Court judges to sit during the legal vacation. The move keeps the spotlight on a constitutional debate that could reshape how Ghana's courts operate during the break.
The legal tussle began when the former information minister challenged warrants issued by Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie. Those warrants permitted some High Court judges to hear criminal cases during the legal vacation. Oppong Nkrumah argues the decision raises serious constitutional questions, particularly around equality before the law and how administrative discretion is exercised.
Why the injunction was dismissed
Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang dismissed Oppong Nkrumah's interlocutory injunction on Friday, August 21, 2026. In his ruling, the judge found no evidence that the vacation hearings violated the Constitution. He noted that prioritizing certain cases during the vacation does not amount to inequality before the law, and that the warrants did not restrict judges to selected cases only.
The judge also said it would be difficult to challenge the Chief Justice's discretion without proof of ill will. He framed the arrangement as a practical step to help more criminal cases move faster through the system, a goal most Ghanaians would welcome given the backlog in our courts.
Eight grounds for review
Oppong Nkrumah, through his legal team at Davies and Davies, is now asking a three-member panel of the Supreme Court to reverse the ruling. The application lists eight grounds, with a central argument: the single judge overstepped by making findings on issues that belong to the substantive constitutional case still pending before the court.
According to documents shared by thelawplatform.com, the MP points to specific statements in the August 21 ruling that he believes prejudge the main questions. For instance, the judge concluded that the warrants were about giving more criminal cases a chance to be heard expeditiously. Oppong Nkrumah argues such conclusions should wait until the full case is argued.
A debate about fairness and efficiency
This case is bigger than one ruling. It touches on how we balance speed and fairness in our justice system. On one hand, clearing the case backlog is a pressing need. On the other, the MP wants clarity on whether the Chief Justice's discretion, however well intentioned, respects constitutional boundaries.
For the business community and investors, this matters too. A predictable and efficient judicial system is a cornerstone of economic growth. When courts sit during vacations, cases move faster, contracts get enforced sooner, and confidence in the rule of law grows. That is the kind of progress Ghana needs to attract more investment and create opportunities for our people.
What happens next
The Supreme Court will now consider the review application. If the three-member panel agrees with Oppong Nkrumah, vacation trials would be paused until the main case is determined. If not, the courts will continue their work through the break, and the substantive constitutional questions will be heard in due course.
Either way, this is democracy at work. A sitting MP is using the courts to seek clarity on a constitutional issue, and the judiciary is engaging with the arguments. That is a healthy sign for governance in Ghana.
Frequently asked questions
What is the legal vacation in Ghana?
The legal vacation is a period when courts typically do not sit for regular hearings. In Ghana, it usually falls between August and October. However, the Chief Justice can issue warrants to allow certain judges to hear specific cases during this period, often to reduce case backlog.
Can the Supreme Court review its own ruling?
Yes. Under Ghanaian law, the Supreme Court can review its decisions in limited circumstances. A party must file a motion for review, stating specific grounds. A panel of the court then decides whether the review is justified.
Why is Oppong Nkrumah challenging the warrants?
The MP argues that the Chief Justice's warrants raise constitutional questions about equality before the law and administrative discretion. He wants the Supreme Court to determine these issues before vacation trials proceed further.
What could the review change for pending cases?
If the review succeeds, High Court judges would be restrained from conducting trials during the legal vacation until the main constitutional case is resolved. If it fails, the trials will continue as scheduled.