Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie has rejected the position that lawyers can decline to proceed with cases simply because the matters have been scheduled during the legal vacation.
A judge who is sitting and ready to hear a case, he said, cannot be prevented from proceeding merely because counsel has made personal arrangements during the vacation period.
Speaking at the 2nd Quadrennial Delegates Congress of the Senior Staff Association of the Judicial Service of Ghana in Sunyani in the Bono Region, Justice Baffoe-Bonnie said lawyers could take leave only where their clients permitted them to do so.
Also read: Ghana, Russia move to deepen bilateral relations as Ambassador meets Speaker Bagbin
“You cannot say that there is legal vacation, so a judge who is actually sitting and ready to do your case cannot do it. No, that’s not it,” he said.
The Chief Justice criticised the suggestion that a lawyer could inform the Chief Justice that a case should not proceed because counsel had already made personal arrangements during the legal vacation.
He said lawyers have a professional responsibility to their clients and cannot unilaterally determine whether a case should proceed simply because they are unavailable.
“To write to the Chief Justice to say that the cases should be adjourned due to the vacation, so I am not coming, I have already made arrangements outside, so I am not coming,” Justice Baffoe-Bonnie said.
He stressed that where a client grants a lawyer leave, the lawyer can take the break, but that does not mean a judge who is ready to hear a case is automatically barred from proceeding.
“You are a lawyer; you have your clients. If your clients decide to give you leave, well, go on leave, but you cannot say that there is a legal vacation and the judge who is actually sitting cannot do your case. No, that is not it,” he stated.
Justice Baffoe-Bonnie also clarified that decisions on adjournments are made by the judges handling individual cases and do not fall within the administrative authority of the Chief Justice.
“No, adjournments are not at the instance of the Chief Justice. Adjournment is a judicial act. This is so basic,” he said.
His comments come amid a growing disagreement between the judiciary and the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) over the conduct of court proceedings during the legal vacation.
The Chief Justice’s comments follow a letter from the Ghana Bar Association appealing to him over concerns about lawyers being required to appear in court during the vacation.
In the letter dated August 10, 2026, the GBA argued that lawyers who had notified the court of their unavailability during the period should not be compelled to attend proceedings.
The Association said it was responding to petitions from Zoe, Akyea & Co, Dame & Partners, and Sam Okudzeto & Associates concerning notices requiring counsel to appear before judges designated to continue hearing part-heard criminal cases during the vacation.
The GBA maintained that established practice during the legal vacation is for Vacation Courts to deal with urgent and interlocutory matters, rather than conduct trials where the absence of counsel would affect effective participation.
The GBA said the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, C.I. 47, particularly Order 79, Rule 4, provides for three court vacations annually.
According to the Association, the second and longest vacation runs from August 1 to September 30 and is intended to provide lawyers, judges and judicial staff with a period of respite following the demanding court calendar.
While acknowledging that Vacation Courts and Virtual Courts may handle urgent matters, including interlocutory applications, the GBA maintained that trials are ordinarily not conducted during the period.
The Association further argued that the willingness and availability of counsel should be an important consideration when determining whether a matter proceeds.
“Once Counsel in a matter indicates their unavailability to attend Court during the vacation, even though the Court may have listed their case, it cannot proceed with the case in any way,” the GBA stated.
The Association also argued that parties in civil and criminal cases should not be compelled to represent themselves because their lawyers are unavailable during the legal vacation.
While the GBA maintains that lawyers who have indicated their unavailability should not be compelled to attend, the Chief Justice has stressed that the existence of the vacation does not prevent a judge who is sitting and ready from hearing a case.
Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Dr Justice Srem-Sai has also maintained that the decision on whether proceedings should continue rests with the court rather than counsel.
Myjoyonline