Researcher sues AG & Chief Justice over Constitutionality of 2-month Legal Vacation

b) A declaration that the practice of legal vacation as observed by the Superior Courts of Judicature of the Republic of Ghana, in so far as it results ni the suspension of the hearing and determination of cases by theCourt of Appeal and the Supreme Court for a continuous period of two months, thereby occasioning undue delay ni the administration of justice and restricting litigants’ access ot the Courts, is inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1(2), 19(1), 23, 3, 125 and 296 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992, and is therefore unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect ot the extent of the inconsistency.16), in so far as they provide for or permit the suspension ofthe sittings of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court for a continuous period of two months during legal vacation, thereby delaying the hearing and determination of cases and restricting access to justice, are inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1(2), 19(1), 23, 33(1), 125(3), 125 and 296 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992, and are accordingly null, void and of no effect to the extent of the inconsistency.

Plaintiff’s Contention The plaintiff contended that the complete suspension of sittings of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court during the period designated as legal vacation occasions systemic delay in the administration of justice, impedes the timely hearing and determination of pending cases, and unjustifiably restricts litigants’ constitutional rights to a fair hearing within a reasonable time, fair and reasonable administrative treatment, and effective access to the courts, contrary to Articles 19(1), 23, 33, 125 and 296 of the Constitution.