NewzPrivate legal practitioner and host of JoyNews’ Newsfile, Samson Lardy Anyenini, has dismissed suggestions that changes in the composition of the Court of Appeal panel that handled the appeal involving former MASLOC Chief Executive Officer, Sedina Christine Tamakloe-Attionu, were an indication of judicial interference. According to him, such changes are a normal administrative practice within the Court of Appeal and should not be interpreted as an attempt to influence the outcome of cases. Speaking on JoyNews’ The Law on Sunday, August 2, Mr Lardy Anyenini explained that the Court of Appeal sits in panels of three judges and that different panels may handle various stages of the same case depending on the court’s roster and administrative arrangements.
He noted that when Sedina Tamakloe-Attionu’s appeal first came before the Court of Appeal in February 2026, a panel dealt with preliminary and procedural matters. However, when the substantive appeal was ready for hearing and judgment, a different panel had been assigned to the case. “It is the standard established practice in the Court of Appeal for different panels to sit on a single case across various stages of the court proceedings,” he said.
Mr Lardy Anyenini explained that interlocutory applications, procedural motions and preliminary matters are assigned to available panels based on the court’s judicial roster, a system designed to ensure efficient case management. He said litigants could appear before one panel when seeking interim reliefs such as a stay of execution, an injunction, or bail pending appeal, and later appear before another panel when the substantive matter is heard. According to him, the rotation of panels is an administrative mechanism aimed at distributing the workload of the appellate courts and preventing delays in the justice delivery system.
He stressed that the panel that hears the substantive appeal, considers all written submissions and listens to oral arguments is the same panel that reserves the case for judgment and eventually delivers the decision. Using the Sedina Tamakloe-Attionu case as an example, he explained that earlier proceedings before the Court of Appeal involved procedural issues, including applications for extensions of time and confirmation that both parties had filed the required documents. “Once the court is satisfied that all filings have been completed, t…
Private legal practitioner Samson Lardy Anyenini has provided a detailed explanation of the trial, conviction and sentencing of former MASLOC Chief Executive Officer, Sedina Christine Tamakloe-Attionu, following renewed public discussion about the case after her acquittal. Speaking on JoyNews’ The Law on Sunday, August 2, Mr Anyenini explained that Tamakloe-Attionu’s trial followed due legal process, including the decision by the High Court to proceed with the case in her absence after she failed to return to Ghana from a court-approved medical trip to the United States. According to him, Tamakloe-Attionu initially participated in the proceedings after she was arraigned before the court but later applied for permission to travel abroad for medical treatment.
He said the High Court granted her request in July 2021, with the condition that she would return on October 10, 2021, to begin her defence after the prosecution had completed presenting its case. “By the time she was expected to return, she had travelled to the US and never came back,” Mr Anyenini explained. He noted that the court did not immediately proceed without her but instead granted several adjournments and issued notices through her lawyers to give her the opportunity to return and continue the trial.
Summary from source