A contentious legal debate has erupted following the removal of the word "relevance" from the disclosure criteria in Ghana's criminal justice system. Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai has petitioned the Court for review, arguing that the ordinary bench's decision to excise "relevance" effectively rewrites the Practice Direction, potentially undermining the integrity of criminal proceedings.
Dr. Srem-Sai contends that without the explicit requirement of relevance, practitioners might rely solely on the possession of materials, neglecting to consider their actual connection to the issues at hand. He warned that this could lead to a situation where irrelevant documents are disclosed, burdening the process and obscuring pertinent evidence.
In his plea to the Court, the Deputy Attorney-General urged the restoration of "relevance" with its ordinary, non-technical meaning. Alternatively, he proposed the inclusion of the phrase "connected with the matter before the Court" to ensure that a clear nexus exists between requested materials and the case in question. He emphasized that the criminal disclosure regime must maintain a requirement for some demonstrable link between the materials sought and the substance of the case.
Justices Amadu Tanko and Lovelace Johnson, members of the reviewing panel, challenged the DAG to demonstrate the exceptional circumstances necessary to warrant a review. They also cautioned him to accurately represent the ordinary bench's ruling, pointing out that the original decision did stipulate that disclosures must concern documents "material to the case."
Samuel Atta-Akyea, counsel for respondent Adu Boahen, argued that the DAG had failed to meet the stringent threshold required to invoke the Court's review powers. He asserted that no fundamental error of law had been demonstrated and that the ruling already addressed the concern by requiring materials to be "connected to the case." Atta-Akyea further contended that the Court did not violate natural justice by omitting further submissions on the meaning of relevance, as it is within its purview to conduct its own legal research.
The Court has adjourned proceedings until January 14, 2026, when it will deliver its ruling on whether "relevance" should be reinstated or replaced within the country's criminal disclosure framework. The outcome of this legal challenge could have significant implications for the future of criminal justice proceedings in Ghana, potentially reshaping the balance between the rights of the accused and the pursuit of justice.
