Adoa News Adoa News
Member of Parliament for Ofoase-Ayirebi, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, has returned to the Supreme Court seeking to overturn a decision that dismissed his application for an interlocutory injunction against the conduct of criminal trials during the ongoing legal vacation.
Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, sitting as a single Justice of the Supreme Court, dismissed the MP’s earlier application on August 21, 2026.
Oppong Nkrumah is now asking a three-member panel of the apex court to set aside that decision and grant the injunction he initially sought.
The application is linked to his substantive constitutional case challenging administrative directives issued by the Chief Justice, which allow selected High Court judges to sit and hear criminal cases during the legal vacation.
The 2026 legal vacation began on August 1 and is scheduled to end on September 30.
In his latest application, the NPP lawmaker argues that Justice Pwamang made a number of legal errors in arriving at the decision to dismiss his request for interim relief.
One of the central issues concerns whether the Attorney-General is legally entitled to represent the Chief Justice when the administrative actions of the Chief Justice are themselves the subject of a constitutional challenge under Articles 23 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution.
Oppong Nkrumah maintains that the single Justice erred in rejecting his preliminary objection on the matter.
He also contends that the Chief Justice’s failure to file a response to his affidavit and deny the claims contained in his statement of case should have been considered when determining whether an injunction ought to be granted.
The MP further argues that Justice Pwamang exceeded the proper limits of an interlocutory application by making findings which, in his view, effectively determined issues reserved for consideration in the substantive case.
According to Oppong Nkrumah, although the single Justice acknowledged that the substantive constitutional questions were not to be determined at the interlocutory stage, aspects of the ruling nonetheless contained definitive conclusions that substantially prejudged those matters.
He is therefore asking the three-member panel to reconsider the legal reasoning applied in dismissing his earlier application.
Oppong Nkrumah has also raised concerns about the public interest implications of allowing the disputed arrangements to remain in force while the substantive constitutional case is pending.
He argues that the continued hearing of the affected criminal cases could undermine the effectiveness of the constitutional challenge and potentially render the eventual outcome less meaningful.
The legislator further points to the time-sensitive nature of the warrants authorising the affected judges to sit during the legal vacation, arguing that interim relief is necessary because the vacation period is already underway.
He maintains that the balance of convenience favours temporarily suspending the implementation of the arrangements rather than allowing the criminal trials to proceed before the substantive case is finally determined.
Oppong Nkrumah is consequently asking the three-member panel to grant an interlocutory injunction restraining the Chief Justice and the designated High Court judges from implementing, enforcing or otherwise giving effect to the warrants directing them to sit during the legal vacation to conduct criminal trials.