Deputy Attorney-General defends judiciary over legal vacation controversy

By: Eugene Dogbatse Atsu
Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem-Sai has defended the judiciary against allegations that selected criminal cases are being given special attention during the legal vacation period.

Speaking on JoyNews on August 18, he rejected claims that the Chief Justice had personally chosen specific cases and assigned them to selected judges for hearing during the court vacation. He described the allegations as inaccurate and potentially damaging to public confidence in the justice system.

His comments came following the ongoing public debate over the continuation of some criminal trials during the legal vacation and concerns raised by some legal practitioners about the process used to assign cases.

Justice Srem-Sai said there was no provision in the legal vacation warrant suggesting that special criminal cases had been singled out for hearing. He stressed that the assertions being circulated were not supported by the facts and challenged those making the claims to provide evidence.

“There is a bit of untruth in there,” he said. “There is nothing like that in the warrant. I am looking forward to the Supreme Court making a pronouncement, and I am also looking forward to them showing how they came to the conclusion that the Chief Justice selected some cases and asked judges to hear them.”

According to him, allegations of judicial favoritism carry serious implications because members of the public generally regard lawyers as credible sources of information. He warned that unverified claims could erode trust in both the legal profession and the courts.

“When lawyers speak, the public trusts that what they are saying is true,” he noted. “When a lawyer comes out to make an allegation as serious as this against the Chief Justice, when indeed that is not the case, it deceives the public and affects confidence in the judiciary.”

Justice Srem-Sai further explained that legal vacation does not mean the courts cease operations entirely. Instead, he said, the judiciary has long maintained a system where designated vacation judges continue to hear cases while other judges take their annual leave.

He described the arrangement as a long-standing tradition aimed at ensuring the justice system continues to function efficiently throughout the year.

Addressing claims that vacation judges are limited to hearing motions and cannot conduct substantive trials, the Deputy Attorney-General dismissed the argument as legally and practically flawed.

“There is this argument that vacation judges only hear motions and not proper hearings or trials. That is completely false,” he said.

He explained that vacation judges are regular judges who temporarily sacrifice part of their leave to handle judicial work during the vacation period. Once the courts officially resume, they are entitled to take their deferred vacation.

He argued that preventing vacation judges from hearing substantive matters would create unnecessary delays and place additional pressure on the court system.