The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed a review application filed by the Member of Parliament for Ofoase Ayirebi, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, in his continuing challenge against the hearing of selected criminal cases during the legal vacation.
A three member panel of the apex court, presided over by Justice Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, dismissed the application on Wednesday, September 2, 2026, after determining that the legislator had failed to satisfy the stringent threshold required for the Court to exercise its review jurisdiction.
The application followed an earlier ruling by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, sitting as a single Justice of the Supreme Court, which rejected Mr Oppong Nkrumah’s request for an interlocutory injunction intended to prevent the enforcement of warrants authorising selected High Court judges to conduct criminal proceedings during the legal vacation.
The Ofoase Ayirebi legislator had challenged the constitutionality and legality of the warrants, arguing that the decision to allow certain criminal trials to proceed during the vacation raised important questions concerning the administration of justice and the proper exercise of the Chief Justice’s powers.
After the initial injunction application was dismissed, Mr Oppong Nkrumah invoked the review jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in an effort to overturn that decision. His legal team maintained that the earlier ruling contained errors apparent on its face and therefore warranted intervention by the apex court.
At Wednesday’s proceedings, however, counsel for the MP, Frank Davies, first sought an adjournment, explaining that documents filed by the Attorney General’s Department had been served on him late. He argued that additional time was necessary to examine the documents and prepare an adequate response before the substantive application was heard.
The Court declined the request and proceeded with the review application. Justice Kulendi noted that the Court had sufficient material before it to determine the legal questions arising from the application and consequently directed counsel to proceed with his arguments.
In advancing the review application, Mr Davies argued that the single Justice had adopted an erroneous approach to the distinction between civil proceedings and criminal trials during the legal vacation. He questioned why warrants would be necessary to authorise criminal proceedings during the vacation if such trials could ordinarily continue without them.
Counsel further contended that the earlier ruling had ventured too deeply into issues relating to the merits of the substantive constitutional case. He also challenged the approach taken in assessing the request for an interlocutory injunction, arguing that the appropriate consideration should have been whether there was a serious legal question requiring determination rather than whether the substantive case had strong prospects of success.
The Attorney General’s Department opposed the review application. Deputy Attorney General Dr Justice Srem Sai argued that the Supreme Court’s review jurisdiction is limited and should not be transformed into another avenue for appealing or re arguing matters that had already been considered by a single Justice.
According to the Deputy Attorney General, Mr Oppong Nkrumah had failed to demonstrate the special or exceptional circumstances required for the Supreme Court to interfere with the earlier decision. He maintained that the grounds advanced by the applicant essentially revisited arguments that had already been presented before Justice Pwamang.
After considering the affidavits, statements of case, legal authorities and oral submissions from both sides, the Supreme Court concluded that the application had failed to meet the required threshold on every ground raised.
The Court consequently dismissed the application as unmeritorious, leaving the earlier decision of Justice Pwamang intact. The full reasons for Wednesday’s decision are expected to be made available at the Registry of the Supreme Court on September 7, 2026.
The dispute originated from Mr Oppong Nkrumah’s substantive constitutional action concerning warrants issued to selected High Court judges to enable them to hear criminal cases during the legal vacation, which runs from August 1 to September 30, 2026.
The warrants relate to criminal proceedings involving former National Signals Bureau Director General Kwabena Adu Boahen and former National Food Buffer Stock Company Chief Executive Officer Abdul Hanan Wahab. Mr Oppong Nkrumah had sought to suspend the operation of the warrants until the Supreme Court determines his substantive constitutional challenge.
The latest ruling therefore constitutes another setback for the Ofoase Ayirebi MP in his attempt to challenge the legal framework governing the conduct of criminal trials during the judicial vacation. However, the dismissal of the review application does not itself determine the substantive constitutional questions raised in his broader action, which remain before the Court.
