GBA has no business responding to law firms’ petitions – Dafeamekpor

Majority Chief Whip and President of the Ghana Law Society, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has criticised the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) for responding to concerns raised by some law firms over the availability of lawyers during proceedings on the petition against the Chief Justice.

Mr Dafeamekpor argued that the GBA had no basis to intervene because the complaints were made by law firms rather than individual lawyers who are members of the Association.

Speaking on Newsnite on Tuesday, August 11, he said the distinction between lawyers and law firms was important in determining whether the GBA had a mandate to respond to the concerns.

“GBA has no business responding to statements from non-members of the GBA,” he said.

According to Mr Dafeamekpor, individual lawyers are licensed to practise by the General Legal Council (GLC), while law firms are separately licensed entities.

He therefore questioned why the GBA would respond to petitions originating from law firms.

“The petition in question is not coming from lawyers. It's coming from law firms. Check the petitions. It's not the lawyers who are complaining. It's the law firms,” he said.

He further questioned whether law firms could be considered members of the GBA for purposes of the Association responding to their concerns.

“Are law firms that are complaining that their lawyers are not available, are they members of the GBA?” he asked.

Mr Dafeamekpor maintained that lawyers who personally believed they could not participate in the proceedings should have petitioned the Chief Justice in their individual capacities.

“So if you want to petition the CJ, petition on your terms as a lawyer. Don't petition on your letterhead as a firm. Then it is the firm that is sending the petition,” he stated.

The Majority Chief Whip also questioned the substantive basis of the complaints, arguing that larger law firms should have sufficient personnel to ensure that court matters continue even when some senior lawyers are engaged elsewhere.

He cited the law firms associated with Sam Okudzeto and Akyea as examples, claiming that they have more than 20 and 15 lawyers respectively.

“How is it possible that none of these lawyers are able to work during the petition?” he asked.

Drawing on his own experience in legal practice and court proceedings, Mr Dafeamekpor said senior lawyers could delegate cases to senior associates or other lawyers within their firms when they were unavailable.

“I have also participated extensively before, and during the petition, seniors can ask even senior associates on the firm to hold their brief in a matter that may have been listed to be continued during the petition,” he said.

Mr Dafeamekpor consequently rejected suggestions that the ongoing proceedings had created an unusual situation for the affected law firms.

He said there was nothing inherently problematic about lawyers being required to make alternative arrangements within their respective firms.

“My suspicion here is that there's nothing untoward in this matter. And so the GBA is just blowing hot air,” he said.

His comments come amid an ongoing debate over the participation of lawyers in court proceedings during the legal vacation period and the extent to which matters should proceed when counsel indicate that they are unavailable.

The Ghana Bar Association has previously urged the Chief Justice to ensure that established rules and traditions governing the legal vacation are respected, particularly where lawyers have notified courts of their inability to appear during the period.