…He applies for stay of execution

Moments after Ghana’s highest court, the Supreme Court gave reasons for its landmark decision that declared the Fast Track Courts in the country unconstitutional, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Nana Akufo-Addo said his determination to go on with the review has been fortified and increased by the unconvincing reason given by the majority.

To him, it is unfortunate that the majority side made references to archaic British laws which have been repealed and that there was no attempt to make reference to the country’s own specific circumstances and also to bring the 1992 Constitution into direct focus.

“Inconsistent dependence on Gold Coast legislation and English colonial legislation, that is not what this case is about. We are talking about the modern Constitution of our country and what it serves and I did not hear anything from the majority that has weakened or attempted to erode the need for the review. The review is absolutely possible in the light of the majority decision.”

Currently, the Attorney-General’s office is processing all the necessary documents and would respond quickly by filing its papers. According to the A-G, the majority made very serious errors, which he would capitalize on to get the decision reversed.

He said his department assumes that once the expanded statement was completed and served on the other side, under the rules, they have two weeks to respond.

The A-G stated “if we work on that principle, we should by the middle of April, latest by 15th have all our papers ready for hearing, and then the question of the Chief Justice empanelling the court would arise.”

To the A-G, it is the public interest that this matter would be concluded as rapidly as possible, so that everybody would know their stand. In his view, the Chief Justice has ample power under the Constitution to re-arrange and provide for the business of Superior Courts of Judicature.

“He has the power to determine the number of divisions as well as the number of justices that should be organised around the High Court,” he said.

In order to uphold the already determined cases under the Fast Track Court, the A-G has filed a motion for a stay of execution of judgment, pending the outcome of the review.

To the A-G, the simplest thing to do is to preserve the status quo as it is now, until the review. “Once the review is over, that is, if the review sustains the decision of the Supreme Court, that ends the matter. The Fast Track Court is history and all that it has done is history, and then of course, the consequential thing can be done. In the same manner, if the Supreme Court reverses the decision, and says the court is constitutional, that is also automatic, he said.

As it stands, the fate of former ministers of state who have been convicted by the fast track court is still in a limbo. Selormey and Mallam Isa would have to wait a little longer, at least after the review to know their fate.