Deputy Attorney General Dr Justice Srem-Sai has described the Ghana Bar Association’s (GBA) interpretation of legal vacation as “bizarre” and “not workable”.

He says the position could effectively prevent judges from hearing their own cases for months, creating further delays in the administration of justice.

The comments follow concerns from the GBA and defence lawyers over the conduct of trials during the legal vacation, which runs from August 1 to September 30 for Ghana’s superior courts.

The Judiciary continues to designate vacation courts to handle urgent matters during the period.

Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express, Justice Srem-Sai explained that a vacation judge is still entitled to his or her own vacation.

He said that when a judge works during the vacation, the judge subsequently proceeds on vacation when the courts resume.

“A vacation judge is also a judge who is entitled to his vacation, so when he works on vacation, what he does is that, just as the courts come back, then he goes, proceeds on his vacation.”

He rejected the suggestion that a vacation judge should only handle motions and urgent matters.

According to him, the Chief Justice may attach cases from other courts to a vacation court, but the judge can still hear the substantive matters in cases belonging to that judge’s own court.

“It is bizarre, and I think for now, there’s ample evidence even from the media. Journalists have been able to pull out several cases, instances where courts have conducted trials, superior courts have conducted trials during the legal vacation.”

He cited the Takoradi Girls case as one example, saying it was tried during the legal vacation despite protests from defence counsel.

Justice Srem-Sai also disputed the claim that lawyers must agree before a trial can proceed during the vacation.

He warned that giving lawyers such control could undermine judges' role in balancing competing interests.

“What it means is that now lawyers are deciding how cases should be conducted, which is never the essence of establishing a judiciary.”

He said lawyers on opposing sides could naturally have different interests, with one seeking a speedy trial and the other preferring delays.

“That is why we need a judge to balance the interests and give us where justice will be.”

Justice Srem-Sai said he supports speedy trials because the Constitution requires accused persons to receive a fair and speedy trial.

“I want it fast, and I want it fast because the law, the Constitution, demands that we conduct trials fast, quickly, speedily.”

He acknowledged, however, that there can be strategic reasons for defence lawyers to seek delays, particularly because evidence can deteriorate and memories can fade over time.

On accusations that the government is pushing cases through the vacation courts to satisfy political supporters, Justice Srem-Sai said political and constitutional interests can coincide.

“So, the NDC’s interest in this case seems to align with the constitutional demand, so there’s nothing wrong about that.”

He rejected claims that the government is manipulating the legal vacation to secure convictions, insisting that such allegations must be supported by evidence.

“That allegation is what we are expecting that they will prove, because whatever the Chief Justice has done, at least the evidence shows that it is the standard practice for decades, for so many years, in this country that during vacation judges sit, vacation courts are appointed.”

He further argued that if the government were manipulating the courts, other cases would not be proceeding while some judges are on vacation.

“There are cases, oral cases before some judges who are not vacation judges; those cases are not moving because the judges in those cases are on vacation.”