<<Print>>

The case involving Former Supreme Court Judge, Justice Kpegah, Nana Akufo-Addo and the General Legal Council has been adjourned by an Accra Fast-track High Court because lawyers for Justice Kpegah expressed their discomfort with the judge assigned to handle the case. In court on Thursday, Lawyer David Annan who represented Justice Kpegah told the court they had filed a petition with Judicial Council with respect to their discomfort with Justice K. A Ofori Atta presiding over the case and wants him to recuse himself before the substantive case could be heard. Justice Kpegah had earlier filed a petition against the judge with the Chief Justice and it was dismissed. The retired Supreme Court judge, Justice Francis Kpegah, has accused the 2012 flagbearer of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Nana Akufo-Addo of impersonation and for holding himself as a lawyer when his name is not on the roll of lawyers in Ghana. However, the case which was scheduled for hearing on Thursday had to be adjourned indefinitely awaiting the decision of the petition filed by lawyers for Justice Kpegah against Presiding Judge Justice K. A Ofori Atta. Meanwhile lead counsel for Nana Addo, Frank Davies has expressed disappointment in the decision to adjourn the case indefinitely. Speaking to Citi News, Lawyer Davies said he was of the firm belief that the case should have been heard despite the petition filed by the Kpegah camp against the Presiding judge. �I must place it on record that even though the judge has decided to await the petition to the judicial council, we the lawyers for Nana Akufo-Addo are not happy and feel saddened by the decision to adjourn the matter because the petition to the judicial council does not operate in law as a stay of proceedings before His Lordship Justice Ofori Atta,� he stated. Lawyer Davies further mentioned, �That is the decision the judge has taken and we cannot quire with it but we feel very disappointed because our Client, Nana Akufo-Addo�s name is still lingering on for nothing. His reputation is being muddied for nothing.� Adding that, �this matter has come on before and has been dismissed by a court of competent jurisdiction and the plaintiff has filed the same action in another court. This is an abuse on the processes of our court.�