A legal researcher, Elorm Kwami Gorni, has gone to the Supreme Court seeking an end to the two-month judicial vacation observed by Ghana’s Superior Courts, arguing that the practice undermines timely access to justice.
Mr Gorni has filed a constitutional action against the Attorney-General and the Chief Justice, asking the Supreme Court to declare the annual legal vacation unconstitutional to the extent that it prevents or significantly limits the hearing and determination of cases.
The legal vacation runs from August 1 to September 30 each year. While the High Court continues to deal with urgent matters through designated vacation courts, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court generally suspend their regular sittings during the period.
According to Mr Gorni, the suspension creates delays in the administration of justice and potentially infringes on the constitutional right of persons to have their cases determined within a reasonable time.
He is relying on Articles 2(1) and 130(1) of the 1992 Constitution, which empower the Supreme Court to enforce and interpret constitutional provisions.
At the centre of his case is Article 19(1), which guarantees a fair hearing within a reasonable time.
Mr Gorni contends that the judicial vacation must also be examined against Article 23, which deals with fair administrative justice, as well as Article 33 concerning the enforcement of fundamental human rights and the right of appeal.
He has further cited Articles 125 and 296, which relate to the administration of justice and the exercise of discretionary powers respectively.
The researcher is specifically challenging 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).
He wants the court to strike down the affected provisions insofar as they authorise or permit the continuous suspension of sittings of the two Superior Courts throughout the legal vacation.
Beyond declaring the practice unconstitutional, Mr Gorni is asking the Supreme Court to interpret Article 19(1) as imposing a continuing obligation on the State and the Judiciary to organise the justice system in a manner that guarantees timely access to the Superior Courts.
He has proposed that the Chief Justice introduce administrative measures, including rotational vacation sittings, to ensure that the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can continue determining cases during the two-month period.
Mr Gorni argues that such a system would strike a balance between ensuring continuous access to justice and allowing judges and lawyers to take their annual vacation.
The suit therefore places before the Supreme Court a broader constitutional question over whether the administrative practice of suspending regular sittings during the legal vacation is compatible with the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time.
