The Supreme Court has dismissed an interlocutory injunction application by Ofoase-Ayirebi MP and lawyer Kojo Oppong Nkrumah seeking to suspend criminal proceedings scheduled to continue during the 2026 legal vacation.
The application sought to halt the operation of administrative warrants issued by the Chief Justice directing selected High Court judges to sit during the vacation period, which runs from August 1 to September 30, 2026.
Justice Gabriel Pwamang, sitting as a single Justice of the Supreme Court, ruled on Friday, August 21, 2026, that Mr Oppong Nkrumah had failed to establish a proper case for the grant of an interlocutory injunction.
Mr Oppong Nkrumah, represented by private legal practitioner Frank Davies, had asked the Court to preserve the status quo pending the determination of his substantive constitutional challenge to the warrants.
The substantive suit questions the extent of the Chief Justice’s discretionary powers in administering the courts and whether that discretion was exercised in accordance with the 1992 Constitution.
A key issue in the constitutional challenge relates to Article 296, which sets out the constitutional principles governing the exercise of discretionary powers by public officials and institutions.
Mr Oppong Nkrumah maintains that while the Chief Justice has administrative authority over the Judiciary, that authority is not unfettered and must be exercised within the limits imposed by the Constitution.
The challenge also raises questions about the selection of particular criminal cases for hearing during the legal vacation and the constitutional limits of administrative discretion in the management of judicial proceedings.
Substantive Case Remains Pending
Although the Supreme Court has rejected the injunction application, the decision does not finally determine the constitutional challenge itself.
The substantive case remains before the Supreme Court, which will have to determine whether the Chief Justice’s warrants directing selected judges to conduct criminal trials during the legal vacation are constitutionally valid.
For now, the dismissal of the injunction means the affected criminal proceedings can continue while the broader and more substantive constitutional questions remain pending before the apex court.
Speaking after the ruling, counsel for Mr Oppong Nkrumah, Frank Davies, said the legal team would respect the decision and study the Court’s full reasoning before advising their client on the next course of action.
Mr Davies said lawyers should not condemn judges simply because a ruling goes against their clients, but may properly critique judicial decisions.
He added that the legal team had applied for a certified true copy of the ruling from the Court Registrar and would study the written decision before determining their next steps.
