Priivate legal practitioner Thaddeus Sory has called on lawyers to rely on established legal procedures when challenging judicial or administrative decisions, rather than resorting to public campaigns, media commentary or court boycotts.
His remarks come amid growing disagreement over Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie’s decision to authorise selected High Court judges to sit during the current legal vacation.
Lawyers representing former National Signals Bureau Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene and former National Food Buffer Stock Company Chief Executive Officer Hanan Abdul-Wahab have objected to the arrangement and are seeking to have their cases deferred until October, when the new legal year begins.
Speaking on the KSM Show on Monday, August 17, 2026, Mr Sory said lawyers who disagree with decisions affecting their clients have several avenues available to them within the legal system.
He advised lawyers to first raise their concerns before the judge handling the matter and, where necessary, pursue an appeal or other appropriate legal proceedings.
“The judge is going to write the ruling. You can challenge it,” he said.
Mr Sory also urged lawyers who disagree with an administrative decision of the Chief Justice to engage directly with the judicial leadership instead of immediately turning to the media.
“If you are not happy with the Chief Justice’s decision, you can actually go and meet up with the Chief Justice and say, look, as parties, we want to come and discuss this directive,” he said.
He questioned the need to make allegations of political interference or bias before exhausting the available legal mechanisms.
“Why don’t we engage the system in the appropriate way?” he asked.
According to Mr Sory, public commentary on sensitive judicial matters could sometimes escalate tensions and influence public perceptions without necessarily addressing the substantive legal issues.
He cautioned that such approaches could “inflame passions” rather than help resolve disagreements within the legal framework.
His comments come as the dispute over hearings during the legal vacation continues to generate debate within the legal community, with affected lawyers insisting on their right to challenge the arrangement through appropriate means.
