Lawyer for former National Signals Bureau (NSB) Director-General Kwabena Adu-Boahene has criticised the decision to continue his client’s trial during the legal vacation, describing it as a departure from established judicial practice.

Speaking on JoyFM’s Top Story on Tuesday, August 11, Samuel Atta Akyea questioned why the case was being treated differently from other criminal matters during the legal vacation.

He said while the judge had the authority to order the continuation of the proceedings, he would not support what he described as an “aberration” of the traditions of the legal profession.

“I think what the judge has said, he has the right to say he will continue and let them cross-examine, but I'm not going to lend my energies and support to what I see as an aberration, a cancellation of the traditions at the Bench and the Bar.”

His comments follow a decision by the High Court in Accra to give Mr Adu-Boahene and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng, six days to secure lawyers for the continuation of their trial on August 17.

• Read also: Adu-Boahene, wife may cross-examine prosecution witness themselves if lawyers stay away, Judge warns

The court warned that if the accused persons fail to appear with their lawyers on the next adjourned date, they will be required to personally continue the cross-examination of the fourth prosecution witness.

Justice Francis Apangabonu Achibonga, a Court of Appeal judge sitting as an additional High Court judge, further directed that should the accused persons decline to conduct the cross-examination themselves, the witness would be discharged.

The directive followed proceedings on Tuesday, August 11, when Mr Adu-Boahene and his wife appeared in court without their legal team.

Mr Atta Akyea argued that the legal vacation was intended to allow judges and lawyers to take a break, with only urgent matters being handled during the period.

“What is the meaning of legal vacation? The CJ is on legal vacation, is it not? The Supreme Court is shut down. The Court of Appeal is shut down. And the High Court is also shut down in substantial respects, save a few who should handle emergencies,” he said.

He questioned the basis for treating the Adu-Boahene case as an emergency that warranted proceedings during the vacation.

"What is the emergency about the Adu-Boahene case that if today we don't want to rest, we want to continue, so that what happens? ...Spare us this selective justice. I will not be part of it."

The lawyer also accused the judicial system of applying selective treatment to cases, arguing that several other criminal matters could equally be considered important.

He cited murder, manslaughter and rape cases among matters that remain before the courts and questioned why some cases should be prioritised over others during the legal vacation.

“If we believe that legal vacation is not important, let's delete it from the Cause Act and the C.I. 47,” he said.

Mr Atta Akyea stressed that his objection was based on principle and did not mean he was abandoning his client.

“I'm not giving up on my client, but I'm upholding principle,” he said.

He maintained that if the legal vacation system was to be set aside for certain cases, the same approach should apply fairly across the justice system.

“What kind of justice delivery system is this one? I don't get it,” he added.