Lawyer for the Member of Parliament for Ofoase-Ayirebi, Frank Davies, has questioned the decision to adjourn Chairman Wontumi’s bail application pending appeal to October 15, 2026.
Mr Davies argued that the bail application, being an urgent matter, could have been heard during the ongoing legal vacation in August or September instead of being pushed to October.
Speaking after Thursday’s proceedings at the Supreme Court, he said vacation courts were established to deal with urgent and critical applications, including bail matters.
Chairman Wontumi, whose real name is Bernard Antwi Boasiako, is serving a 20-year prison sentence imposed by the Accra High Court after he was convicted of illegal-mining-related offences.
His lawyers have appealed against the conviction and sentence and subsequently filed an application for bail pending the determination of the appeal.
The application was scheduled to be heard on August 19, 2026, but the matter could not proceed after Wontumi and his lead counsel, Samuel Atta Akyea, were absent from court.
The court subsequently adjourned the application to October 15.
Mr Davies questioned why the matter could not have been rescheduled for an earlier date within the legal vacation if the judge was unavailable on August 19.
“If you have a serious application like bail, pending appeal, a bail, it should be—that is the essence of the vacation court—to deal with such applications,” he said.
He suggested that the case could have been moved to the following week or to September rather than October.
“If she were indisposed, may God grant her health and speedy recovery as such. Why was the case adjourned to the following week? Or even to September?” he asked.
Mr Davies further questioned the decision to schedule the next hearing for October 15.
“Why did she adjourn to October? When could she have adjourned to maybe two weeks, in August or in September? Why?” he said.
He also raised concerns about whether urgent applications were being treated equally, asking: “Are there two different sets of rights in this country? Superior rights and lesser rights?”
Mr Davies maintained that the legal vacation is primarily intended to deal with urgent applications and other matters requiring immediate judicial attention.
“On vacation, you only deal with interim applications and urgent and critical matters,” he said.
His comments come amid a wider debate over the handling of court proceedings during the legal vacation and the circumstances under which selected criminal cases are being heard during the period.
ALSO READ:
Supreme Court to rule Friday on challenge to Chief Justice’s legal vacation directives
NPP Oti Women’s Organiser visits former contender after NPP election
