In a stinging ruling, the court described the application as “lacking merit,” signalling its refusal to entertain what it considered an attempt to derail the judicial process.
Gifty Oware-Mensah had argued that certain constitutional questions arising from her prosecution required interpretation by the Supreme Court.
However, the High Court was unconvinced, holding that the issues raised did not justify suspending proceedings or invoking the apex court’s jurisdiction.
Legal observers say the ruling reinforces the judiciary’s growing intolerance for procedural tactics perceived as delay strategies, particularly in high-profile cases involving public officials.
The court’s stance underscores the principle that constitutional referrals must be substantive, not speculative or convenient shields against trial.
The case against the former NSA official forms part of broader efforts to enforce accountability within public institutions, where allegations of misconduct have increasingly found their way before the courts.
With the application dismissed, Gifty Oware-Mensah is now expected to face the full trial process as the court moves to hear the substantive case.
For many, the ruling sends a clear message: the courtroom is for justice, not escape routes.