Lawyer for former Chief Executive Officer of the National Petroleum Authority (NPA), Mustapha Abdul-Hamid, has pushed back against comments by Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem-Sai, insisting that the Constitution guarantees the speedy trial of all cases and not only selected ones.

Joseph Kpemka, who is representing the former NPA boss, described the Deputy Attorney-General's interpretation of the constitutional provision on expeditious trials as erroneous, arguing that it does not support the selective fast-tracking of specific cases.

Speaking to JoyNews at the Accra High Court on Tuesday, August 18, the former Deputy Attorney-General said comments made by Justice Srem-Sai during an appearance on PM Express had reinforced concerns raised by the defence team about what they describe as selective justice.

According to Mr Kpemka, while the Constitution recognises the importance of expeditious trials to ensure cases are resolved through either acquittal or conviction, it does not authorise the prioritisation of particular cases over others.

"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," he said.

He argued that if the country's judicial system is to achieve the objective of speedy justice, the principle must be applied uniformly across all cases before the courts.

Mr Kpemka further questioned whether the constitutional provision being cited by the Deputy Attorney-General specifically permits the expedited hearing of only certain cases.

"The fundamental question is whether the Constitution says we should select some cases and expeditiously try them or whether it says we should expeditiously try all cases," he said.

The comments come against the backdrop of a legal challenge filed by Ofoase-Ayirebi Member of Parliament, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, at the Supreme Court.

The injunction application 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.

Although Mr Kpemka declined to comment extensively on the merits of the case, he expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would grant the reliefs being sought.

Meanwhile, the Accra High Court has adjourned proceedings in the case involving Mustapha Abdul-Hamid and seven others to August 27.

The NPA case has become the latest high-profile trial to be affected by the injunction application before the Supreme Court.

On Monday, proceedings in the Buffer Stock and National Signals Bureau cases were also halted pending the outcome of the legal challenge.

The Supreme Court's decision is expected to determine whether the Chief Justice's directive allowing selected criminal trials to continue during the legal vacation is consistent with constitutional provisions governing the administration of justice.

Until then, several ongoing criminal proceedings are likely to remain on hold.