A private citizen, Elorm Kwami Gorni, has filed a suit at the Supreme Court against the Attorney General and Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, challenging the constitutionality of Ghana’s judicial vacation system. He is asking the Court to determine whether the annual suspension of sittings at the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court—lasting roughly two months—comports with the constitutional guarantee of timely access to justice.
The suit, filed on July 28, 2026, invokes the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Articles 2(1) and 130(1) of the 1992 Constitution. The Attorney General and the Chief Justice are named as the first and second defendants, respectively. At the centre of the challenge are 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), to the extent that they permit the suspension of sittings at the two appellate courts during the legal vacation.
Under the current arrangement, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court do not sit from August 1 to September 30. Mr Gorni argues that the suspension can delay litigants with pending matters before the two courts, particularly those seeking urgent reliefs. He contends that the arrangement affects matters including appeals, applications for stay of execution, interlocutory applications, constitutional actions and judicial review proceedings.
According to the suit, the legal vacation regime is inconsistent with several provisions of the 1992 Constitution, including Articles 19(1), 23, 33, 125 and 296.
Mr. Gorni contends that suspending court sittings infringes upon the constitutional guarantee of a fair hearing within a reasonable time and restricts access to justice for litigants with pending appeals. He further argues that the scheduling of the judicial calendar and decisions regarding when courts convene are administrative functions that must be exercised with fairness and reasonableness.
The plaintiff emphasises, however, that his challenge is not directed at judges taking annual leave or periods of rest. Rather, he seeks a determination from the Supreme Court on whether judicial leave can be structured without halting the constitutional functions of the nation’s two highest appellate courts, thereby avoiding delays in pending cases.
Among the reliefs sought is an order directing the Chief Justice to explore alternative arrangements—such as rotational sittings, vacation panels, or staggered leave schedules—to ensure that the courts remain operational throughout the year. Mr Gorni argues that the number of justices serving on the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal makes such arrangements possible while still allowing judges to take their entitled leave.
The suit comes amid an ongoing debate over the scope and application of Ghana’s legal vacation, including whether substantive cases should be heard during the period and the circumstances under which judges may be authorised to sit.
The latest challenge therefore puts the legal vacation regime itself before the Supreme Court for constitutional scrutiny, with the plaintiff seeking changes that would allow the appellate courts to remain operational throughout the year while preserving judicial officers’ entitlement to leave.
Source: William Narh
