The Supreme Court presided by a single judge, H/L Justice George Kingsley Koomson, has reprimanded the Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice (A-G) for constant excuses for non-compliance with procedural timelines on grounds of administrative bottlenecks.

The Court scolded the office of the A-G for its constant breach of procedural timelines in the case of Ibrahim Fuseini & Anor. vrs. Inspector General of Police & Anor. Suit No. J8/156/26. The Court in the assertive voice of Justice Koomson registered its disposition of not further entertaining the serial excuse of administrative bottlenecks for procedural non-compliance by lawyers of the A-G during proceedings dated the 30th day of April, 2026 in the hearing of an application by the A-G for the extension of time to file its Statement of case in the matter.

The Supreme Court upon the calling of the above case and after the recording of Counsel for the parties drove its gaze to lawyers of the A-G who were nestled at their oft-preferred spot at the left side of the Bar of the Supreme Court. As if anticipating the reasons for non-compliance with timelines for the filing of the Statement of Case of the Applicant-nominal defendant, the Court said “do not tell me administrative bottlenecks is reason for delay.”

STAR OF THE MONTH - Professor Philip Ebow Bondzi-Simpson ESQ.

Yudah Brown, Influential Law Content Creator, Declares SRC Presidential Bid

The Supreme Court said that the excuse of administrative bottlenecks as ferried by the A-G for delay in responding to the case of the Respondent in the matter was unacceptable as there are other persons who are sued not just the Attorney-General and thus, the A-G ought to have acted and not occasioned delay to the case on the altar of administrative bottlenecks.

Instructions not received

In her attempt at explaining away the default of the A-G, Counsel for the A-G suggested to the Court that they had to receive instructions from the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice on the arguments to be filed in reaction to the case of the Respondent. That aside, in what appeared to be explanation for the serial breach of procedural timelines, Counsel from the A-G’s office said they sometimes need to receive documentation and responses from other state offices and officers, reason why they tarry in filing processes.

On the need for instructions from the Attorney-General before filing of a Statement of Case, the Court suggested to Counsel for the A-G that a Statement of case contains legal arguments and thus, there is no need for any advice from the Minister in the legal arguments to be put before the Court.

Administrative excuses should be stopped

Justice Koomson after patiently listening to the explanations from Counsel for the A-G, said “I have been complaining that the administrative excuses should stop". He added to his complaint that Attorneys from the Chambers of the A-G always want the Court to bail them for procedural lapses. According to the Court, "Our A-G's department they want us to bail them, you people should sit up”.

With a face of displeasure, HL Koomson said “next time don’t come with 'our client delayed with information' ". "Next time if such excuses come I shall not grant it." In magnanimity, HL Koomson granted the motion for extension of time to file Statement of Case with orders of filing the said late Statement of Case within 7 days.