Judge unhappy with ‘delay tactics’ by lawyers
A Presideng Judge of the Human Rights High Court, Mr Justice Kofi Essel Mensah, has advised lawyers appearing before the court to avoid tactics that tend to delay cases stressing that the court’s focus now is on ensuring speedy trial.
Advertisement
“The new rules do not entertain these things. If you are going to need something from someone in a case, you say it in advance so that when the trial starts, we can move on,” he said.
Justice Essel Mensah gave the advice when the case involving Kwabena Osei and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) and 10 others was called and cross-examination of the applicant was being done by counsel for VIP Transport, the third defendant in the case.
Cross-examination
Just a few minutes into the cross-examination, counsel for VIP Transport, Mr Frempong Boamah, asked the plaintiff if he had ever boarded any VIP bus to which he answered in the affirmative and counsel went ahead to request for the ticket he was issued with.
But when Osei responded that he had not brought it to court, counsel for VIP Transport then sought to ask for adjournment for the ticket to be produced at the next adjourned date but Justice Essel Mensah intervened that that request should have been made earlier as per the Evidence Decree.
He, therefore, entreated counsel to use the Evidence Decree and to ensure they did not put up any behaviour that would tend to slow down the judicial process, stressing that the focus was now on “speedy trial”.
Counsel for VIP Transport then went ahead to question the capacity of the court to interpret a legislative instrument (LI) that underpinned the case but there again, Justice Essel Mensah countered by saying it was true that the Supreme Court was the only body to interpret the constitution but a High Court could interpret statutes.
Counsel seeks adjournment
When counsel finally sought an adjournment, plaintiff prayed the court to grant an early date since the case had dragged on for three years and that he was prepared to forego an examination and attend court to ensure that justice was done.
Other Trending Stories
The case
Kwabena Osei, a public-spirited Ghanaian, has brought an action against the DVLA and ten others, namely State Transport Company, VIP, Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU) of Trades Union Congress (TUC), O & A Transport, Metro Mass Transit, J A Plant Pool, Progressive Transport Owners Association (PROTOA), Mariset Company Ltd (M Plaza), The Inspector General Of Police (IGP), and the Attorney General.
The plaintiff contends that it is provided under the law that an omnibus shall be constructed to provide at least two entrances or exits for passengers, one of which may be an emergency exit as approved by the licensing authority.
He also held that the first defendant was authority which was created by statute to promote good driving standards in Ghana and ensure the use of roadworthy vehicles on the roads, is charged to ensure strict compliance with the Road Traffic Act 2004, Act 683 and its regulations.
Among other reliefs, Kwabena Osei was praying the court for a declaration that the use of the motor vehicles under reference and many others known and unknown by the defendants was in breach of the Road Traffic Act and that the use of the said omnibuses by the defendants was a violation of the plaintiff’s fundamental human rights.
He is also imploring the court to compel the first defendant to produce to the court, the registration and examination certificates of all such motor vehicles belonging to the defendants which do not conform to the requirements of the regulations for the conveyance of passengers for cancellation by the court.
The case has been adjourned to June 5, 2014.