Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, has rejected suggestions that lawyers can determine whether cases should proceed during the legal vacation, insisting that the power to manage proceedings ultimately rests with the judge assigned to the court.
Speaking in an interview with Sena Numbo on Radio Gold, Dr. Srem-Sai said the legal vacation should not be interpreted as a period when Ghana’s justice system shuts down or lawyers automatically acquire the right to stay away from proceedings.
He explained that while Superior Court judges observe the long legal vacation, the Chief Justice designates selected judges to sit as vacation judges to ensure that the administration of justice continues.
“The legal vacation is not lawyers’ vacation,” he said, stressing that lawyers may seek adjournments when unavailable, but the final decision on whether a case proceeds remains with the court.
According to Dr. Srem-Sai, a lawyer can explain his or her circumstances and request an adjournment, after which the opposing side may respond. However, it remains within the judge’s discretion to grant or refuse the request.
“The fundamental principle is that it is the judge who has the final say,” he maintained.
Atta Akyea’s vacation objection
The controversy follows objections by private legal practitioner Samuel Atta Akyea to court proceedings continuing during the legal vacation.
Atta Akyea has argued that his decision to seek adjournments during the period should not be interpreted as laziness, maintaining that he is seeking adherence to the rules and established practice governing the legal vacation.
The dispute has brought renewed attention to the extent to which lawyers’ availability during the vacation should influence the scheduling and continuation of cases before designated vacation courts.
Dr. Srem-Sai, however, disagreed with the proposition that a lawyer’s decision to observe the vacation can automatically prevent proceedings from continuing.
He maintained that lawyers are entitled to make representations to the court, but those requests cannot override the authority of the presiding judge.
“It is always, whether in term time or in vacation, the judge’s discretion and power to determine when to attend cases [and] how to handle cases,” he said.
The Deputy Attorney-General further explained that a distinction must be made between cases already before a judge designated to sit during the vacation and matters transferred from another judge’s court.
In the latter situation, he said, a vacation judge would generally not take a step that finally disposes of the substantive case. A judge dealing with cases already assigned to his or her own court, however, retains the authority to continue proceedings during the vacation.
Dr. Srem-Sai warned that treating lawyers’ vacation plans as an automatic basis for suspending cases could contribute to unnecessary delays in the administration of justice.
He maintained that while the legal vacation provides for reduced judicial activity, it does not transfer control over court proceedings from judges to lawyers.
His position is that counsel may request accommodation during the vacation, but the decision on whether a case proceeds or is adjourned remains a judicial function.
