Former Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame has firmly rejected any attempt to proceed with the criminal trial of former National Food Buffer Stock Company Chief Executive Officer Hanan Abdul Wahab Aludiba during Ghana’s legal vacation, maintaining that such proceedings depart from long established judicial practice.
Mr Dame, who serves as lead counsel for Mr Abdul Wahab, took the position after appearing before the Accra High Court on Monday, August 17, 2026, where the defence sought to persuade the court to suspend the proceedings until a pending application before the Court of Appeal has been determined. Recent proceedings have centred on several interlocutory applications filed by the defence as the accused continues to contest the charges brought against him.
According to Mr Dame, the defence appeared before the court specifically to demonstrate why proceedings ought to be halted while the appellate application remains unresolved. He explained that the court had indicated that it would first await the outcome of a matter before the Supreme Court before permitting the defence to advance its application for a stay of proceedings.
Mr Dame subsequently made his position unequivocal, declaring that he would not make himself available for a trial conducted during the legal vacation. He argued that his stance was consistent with the position he had maintained throughout the controversy, namely that trials are ordinarily not conducted during the vacation unless the parties have personally agreed to such an arrangement.
The former Attorney General further invoked his more than two decades of experience at the Ghanaian Bar, contending that he had never encountered a situation in which an accused person or litigant was compelled to participate in a substantive trial during the legal vacation without exceptional circumstances warranting such action.
He therefore questioned the justification for treating the Hanan Abdul Wahab case as an urgent matter, insisting that no emergency existed that could reasonably necessitate its continuation during the recess.
Mr Dame explained that, based on his experience, superior courts have traditionally convened during the legal vacation only in circumstances requiring immediate judicial intervention, particularly where constitutional questions connected to elections demanded prompt determination.
As an illustration, he referred to a 2012 dispute involving the Electoral Commission, which he said he handled alongside a former Attorney General. According to him, the urgency surrounding that matter was linked to the proximity of the general elections and the need for the Supreme Court to determine an interlocutory application promptly. He maintained, however, that the substantive proceedings were subsequently deferred until the ordinary judicial calendar resumed.
The former Attorney General also contended that applications seeking a suspension of proceedings are neither unusual nor unprecedented within Ghana’s legal system. He pointed to previous cases in which courts had temporarily halted substantive proceedings while related applications were being considered by superior courts.
His argument comes amid a wider dispute over the judiciary’s decision to allow selected criminal matters to proceed during the legal vacation. Defence lawyers in other high profile cases have also challenged the practice, arguing that it departs from established judicial conventions and raises questions concerning the constitutional rights of accused persons.
The controversy has gained further significance following proceedings involving former National Signals Bureau Director General Kwabena Adu Boahene and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng, where the court directed the accused persons to ensure that their lawyers were present when proceedings resumed. The court indicated that, in the absence of their lawyers, the accused could be required to continue the cross examination themselves.
Mr Dame has maintained that such an approach should not be extended to his client, stressing that an accused person possesses a constitutional entitlement to legal representation and should not be compelled to conduct a criminal trial personally because counsel is unavailable during the legal vacation.
The former NAFCO chief executive and his wife, Faiza Seidu Wuni, are facing criminal allegations arising from their dealings with the state owned food reserve institution. The prosecution has brought charges including stealing, defrauding by false pretences, causing financial loss to the state and money laundering, all of which remain matters for determination by the court. Mr Abdul Wahab and his co accused continue to contest the allegations.
The case has already generated several legal disputes. In July, the High Court rejected an application by Mr Dame seeking to strike out the entire charge sheet, although it directed the prosecution to amend two counts concerning alleged false pretences.
With the latest proceedings now intertwined with the broader legal debate over vacation sittings, the defence is seeking to have the relevant applications determined before the substantive trial advances further. Mr Dame’s latest declaration therefore places his participation squarely within that continuing legal contest, as the parties await further judicial decisions on whether the proceedings should continue during the vacation period.
