Member of Parliament for Ofoase Ayirebi, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, has filed a suit that challenges the constitutionality of administrative warrants issued by the Chief Justice directing selected High Court judges to sit and conduct criminal trials during the legal vacation, with the Chief Justice, Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, as the first defendant and the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dominic Ayine, as the second defendant.
He filed the writ at the Supreme Court on Friday, August 14, 2026.
Mr Oppong Nkrumah is seeking declarations that the administrative warrants issued by the Chief Justice are inconsistent with the Constitution and are therefore null and void.
“A declaration that the action of the Honourable Chief Justice to promote and facilitate the hearing of “special criminal cases” in the legal vacation to the total neglect of other criminal cases is tantamount to selective justice which contravenes the letter and spirit of Article 17(1) of the Constitution 1992 and therefore unconstitutional, null and void.”
In his statement of case, Mr Oppong Nkrumah said his action was not directed at the constitutional authority of the Chief Justice to administer the Judiciary or regulate the sittings of the courts.
“The Plaintiff readily acknowledges that the office of the Chief Justice occupies a unique constitutional position as the head of the Judiciary and is entrusted with broad administrative responsibilities for the effective and efficient functioning of the courts,” the statement said.
However, he argues that the exercise of such administrative powers must remain subject to the Constitution.
“It is a cardinal principle of Ghana’s constitutional order that every constitutional power, however extensive, is subject to the supremacy of the Constitution,” he said.
“The Constitution does not recognise absolute or unreviewable discretionary power. Every public authority, including the Chief Justice, must exercise administrative and discretionary powers in a manner that is fair, reasonable, transparent, non-arbitrary and consistent with the Constitution,” the statement added.
Mr Oppong Nkrumah contends that the warrants have the practical effect of giving priority to selected criminal cases while other pending criminal cases remain outside their scope.
According to him, “The impugned warrants have the practical effect of according priority to selected criminal cases while other pending criminal cases remain outside the scope of the warrants.”
