The New Patriotic Party (NPP) has accused Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie of undermining the independence of the Judiciary by authorising two High Court judges to conduct full criminal trials during the legal vacation.
According to the party, the decision to issue warrants to Justices Achibonga and Kocuvie-Tay to hear substantive criminal cases during the vacation is selective because the affected cases involve persons associated with the opposition party.
NPP General Secretary, Justin Frimpong Kodua, in a statement described the Chief Justice’s defence of the vacation trials as unconvincing and legally unreasonable.
The party questioned why only two of the 29 courts currently sitting as vacation courts had been authorised to conduct full criminal trials requiring the physical presence of accused persons and their lawyers.
According to the NPP, the established practice during the legal vacation is for vacation courts to deal primarily with motions and urgent interlocutory applications rather than substantive criminal trials.
The party cited General Jurisdiction 2 at the Law Court Complex as an example, saying the court handles cases from General Jurisdiction 1 through 7 during the vacation but does not ordinarily conduct substantive trials.
It also cited Tamale Court A and the Goaso High Court, which it said serve multiple jurisdictions during the legal vacation.
The NPP argued that if serious criminal cases, including murder, rape, narcotics and armed robbery cases, can ordinarily be adjourned until the legal term resumes, there should be a clear justification for treating cases involving NPP members differently.
“If the vacation can pause the trial of a murder suspect, why can it not pause the trial of political opponents of the Government?” the party asked.
The NPP linked the development to what it described as an attempt to secure the continued incarceration of its members.
The NPP also disclosed that lawyers representing some of the accused persons had formally written to the Chief Justice asking him to withdraw the warrants.
According to the party, counsel from Zoe, Akyea & Co. and Dame & Partners wrote to the Chief Justice on August 5, 2026, informing him of their unavailability during the legal vacation.
The party further said the Ghana Bar Association wrote to the Chief Justice on August 10, reminding him of the established practice governing vacation courts and raising concerns about proceeding with trials when defence counsel had indicated that they would be unavailable.
The NPP said the concerns had not resulted in the withdrawal of the warrants.
The party also referred to proceedings before one of the two judges on Tuesday, August 11, claiming that the court adjourned a matter for less than a week despite being aware that defence counsel had indicated they would be unavailable.
According to the NPP, the accused was given an ultimatum to secure a new lawyer within days or personally conduct the cross-examination of a prosecution witness.
The party described the development as a serious threat to the accused person’s right to a fair trial.
It cited Article 19 of the 1992 Constitution, which provides protections for persons charged with criminal offences, including the right to defend themselves personally or through a lawyer of their choice.
The NPP argued that the issue went beyond ordinary case management and accused the Chief Justice’s decision to authorise the vacation trials of creating the circumstances that led to the dispute.
The NPP also criticised the circumstances surrounding Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie’s elevation to the position of Chief Justice.
The party referred to the removal of former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, which it said it continues to regard as politically motivated and which, according to the statement, remains the subject of litigation.
It condemned the parliamentary confirmation of the current Chief Justice, claiming that the process proceeded despite objections and a walkout by the Minority.
The party nevertheless said it expected the Chief Justice to exercise his constitutional responsibilities independently.
The NPP accused him of acting in a manner that, in its view, appears to align with the agenda of the Attorney-General against members of the opposition.
“The Judiciary must never become an annex of the Office of the Attorney-General,” the party said.
The NPP consequently demanded that the Chief Justice immediately withdraw the warrants authorising the vacation trials and allow the affected cases to resume when the legal term reopens.
The party also called on the Chief Justice to heed the concerns raised by the Ghana Bar Association and restore what it described as the settled practice governing vacation courts instead of creating a partisan judiciary.
It further called for the ultimatum reportedly issued to the accused person to be rescinded, arguing that no accused person should be compelled to proceed without counsel of their choice.
The party stressed that it remains committed to the rule of law, judicial independence and equality before the law but warned, “We shall resist, by every lawful means, the weaponisation of the courts and the judiciary against our members and against any Ghanaian.”
