The Constitution of Ghana, enshrined in Article 102, guarantees speedy trials for all cases, irrespective of their complexity or the circumstances surrounding them. However, lawyer Mustapha Abdul-Hamid, representing former National Petroleum Authority (NPA) Chief Executive Officer, Kpemka, is vehemently contesting this fundamental principle, asserting that the interpretation of the Constitution does not permit selective fast-tracking of cases. This dispute has intensified following Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem-Sai’s remarks during a PM Express appearance on Tuesday, August 18th, 2023. According to Mr. Kpemka, the Deputy Attorney-General’s assertion that the Constitution prioritizes particular cases over others represents a significant deviation from established legal precedent. Specifically, he argued that the expedited justice provision is intended for all cases, not a selective prioritization of specific outcomes. He stated, “The expedited justice that is being spoken about in the Constitution is talking about all cases, not only selective cases. It is true that the Constitution talks about expeditious trials that will actually lead to acquittal or conviction. But it doesn’t say that you should select cases and do expeditious trials.” Mr. Kpemka further questioned whether the constitutional provision being cited by Justice Srem-Sai specifically permits the expedited hearing of only certain cases. He contends that the fundamental question is whether the Constitution mandates the selection of cases and speedy trials or, conversely, the expeditious trial of all cases. The legal challenge, initiated by Ofoase-Ayirebi Member of Parliament Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, at the Supreme Court, seeks to halt the implementation of a directive issued by the Chief Justice, which allows selected courts to continue hearing certain criminal cases during the legal vacation. This injunction application aims to prevent the continuation of this practice. The Accra High Court, in response to the application, has adjourned proceedings involving Mustapha Abdul-Hamid and seven others to August 27th, 2023. This case represents a significant escalation in a legal battle concerning the administration of justice, with the Supreme Court’s decision expected to determine whether the Chief Justice’s directive regarding selected trials aligns with constitutional principles concerning the equitable application of justice. The NPA case, along with the previous rulings concerning Buffer Stock and National Signals Bureau cases, are all now subject to the scrutiny of the Supreme Court. The legal team representing the NPA boss is confident that the Supreme Court will grant the reliefs sought, acknowledging the potential impact on the judicial process. Meanwhile, the Accra High Court has halted proceedings in the case involving Mustapha Abdul-Hamid and seven others, pending the outcome of the Supreme Court challenge. The NPA case is the latest in a series of high-profile trials that have been affected by the injunction application, highlighting the ongoing debate regarding the balance between judicial efficiency and constitutional principles. The Supreme Court’s ruling is anticipated to significantly impact the administration of justice in Ghana, particularly regarding the interpretation and application of the Constitution. The legal proceedings are expected to continue, with the Supreme Court’s decision holding considerable weight in determining the future of the case. The legal challenge underscores the importance of constitutional interpretation within the judicial system. The NPA case’s impact extends beyond the immediate trial proceedings, potentially influencing broader discussions regarding the fairness and transparency of the judicial process. The Supreme Court’s decision will serve as a crucial benchmark for the future of the administration of justice in Ghana.”}”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Watch Related Video
Source: MyJoyOnline
