Supreme Court asked to declare one-year pupillage unconstitutional
The General Legal Council (GLC) has been dragged to the Supreme Court over the requirement for fresh lawyers to do a year pupillage.
A lawyer, Mawunyo Kofi Adjaho argues this requirement for obtaining a solicitor’s licence is inconsistent with the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
After lawyers are called to the bar, they are required to undertake a one-year pupilage before the GLC makes a determination to issue successful applicants with a licence to practice as a solicitor in the country.
However, a lawyer, Mawunyo Kofi Adjaho has filed a writ at the Supreme Court on Monday, February 3, 2020, challenging the regulation instituted by the GLC that places a restriction on issuance of the certificate.
The Attorney-General (A-G) and the General Legal Council (GCL) are named as first and second defendants respectively.
Mr Adjaho argues that Section 8(4) of the Legal Profession Act deals with the issuance of solicitor’s licences also referred to as practising certificates. The provision states that:
“A person who holds a qualifying certificate and who has been enrolled as a lawyer under Section 3 may be issued with a solicitor’s licence, but that person is not entitled to establish an office as a solicitor unless the Council is satisfied that that person has read for a period of not less than six months in the chambers of another lawyer of not less than seven years’ standing approved by the Council.
The plaintiff argues that it presupposes that lawyers who have been called to the bar should be given the solicitors licences and need not understudy at an established firm up to a year.
However, the plaintiff indicates that the GLC, with the permission of the A-G, made changes to the regulation on December 19, 2017, without recourse to parliament.
GLC then established Regulation 22 of L.I. 2355 with the heading “Practicing Certificate and Pupillage” which states, thus:
“A person who is called to the Bar shall not be issued with a Practicing Certificate unless the person has to the satisfaction of the Council completed a period of one-year pupillage at an approved establishment”.
This, the plaintiff believes violates the spirit of the 1992 Constitution as the amendment was without recourse to the legislature.
He is, therefore, seeking the reliefs below:
a. A declaration that Regulation 22 of the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018 (L.I. 2355) is inconsistent with the letter and spirit of Article 93(2) of the 1992 Constitution and is, therefore, void.
b. A declaration that 2nd defendant (GLC) acted in excess of its powers in promulgating Regulation 22 of the Legal Profession (Professional and Post-Call Law Course Regulations, 2019 (L.I. 2355).
c. An order expunging or striking down Regulation 22 of the Legal Profession (Profession and Post-Call Law Course) Regulations, 2018 (L.I.2355).
d. An order directing the 2nd defendant (GLC) to issue solicitor’s licenses to duly qualified lawyers, including pupils, who have taken the necessary steps to apply for same, but have not completed their pupillages.
e. Any other reliefs or orders the court may deem just, convenient and proper to grant.
Attached is the full writ:
God bless Mawunyo. He has our support.
Thumps up Kofi, we must test our laws.