Our policy has always been one of complete independence from the Government or from political parties and influence. We have never sought or been the subject of governmental or official patronage, and have consequently been able to give unbiased advice to our clients both on questions of law and on other aspects of their operations in this country.

We have survived all the various changes of government in Ghana, from Kwame Nkrumah's 1st Republic through the 2nd , 3rd and 4th Republics and various military regimes, and as a result of our policy of complete independence, important individuals and organisations including former Ministers and high officials, have sought our services and advice on their problems after changes in their circumstances.

During the Second Republic, when the Rule of Law was generally accepted to be the cornerstone of the country's government, we were instructed in several high-profile and constitutional cases such as the Sallah Case: Sallah v. Attorney-General (1970) CC 55 SC; Sallah v. Attorney-General (1970) 2 G & G 493 SC; Sallah v. Attorney-General (1970) 2 G & G 487 SC and the Captan Deportation Case: Captan v. Minister for Home Affairs (Minister of Interior) (1970) 2 G & G 457 CA; Captan v. Minister of Interior (1970) CC 35 SC; Captan v. Minister of Interior (1971) 2 CC 3; Captan v. Minister of Interior (1970) 2 G & G 462. These cases which were the source of embarrassment to the Government of the Second Republic were the sole cause of the sudden and unceremonious deportation of Mr. J. H. Lynes from Ghana in 1970.

We filed several applications and obtained Orders of habeas corpus on his behalf when he was incarcerated in the Usher Fort Prison, and each of the Orders made by the High Court was disobeyed. He was however taken to a Magistrate Court and remanded in custody for 28 days in spite of the Orders of habeas corpus which had been made and which we brought to the attention of the District Magistrate.

After hearing in the Magistrate Court , we obtained an Order of the High Court, Accra, to the effect that “whoever is in charge of John Lynes should produce him in Court the following morning”. We went to serve the Order in the company of Court Bailiffs on Mr. Oku, the Director of Usher Fort Prisons, and upon being served he informed us that he had received instructions from the Castle, the seat of Government, that he should not obey the contents of the Notice served. He repeated this in the presence of Mr. John Lynes, who thereupon instructed us as follows “if the Government is not prepared to obey the Orders of the Court, then there is no point in fighting this matter any further. Please get me out of the country as quickly as possible”.

Previous to this, the Government had flouted the Orders of the Court of Appeal sitting as the Supreme Court in the Sallah case. After judgment in favour of Mr. E. K. Sallah, two (2) Alhajis volunteered evidence before the Court in an attempt to prove bias against Mr. Justice Apaloo, who was a member of the panel in the trial. They both alleged that they went to the Continental Hotel for dinner from the Airport after seeing off some pilgrims to Mecca after midnight . They alleged that they saw Mr. Justice Apaloo and Mr. E. K. Sallah in the company of two (2) unidentified ladies having dinner in the restaurant at the Continental Hotel. They also had dinner in the restaurant.

We were able to establish with evidence from the Restaurant Manager that:

1. The restaurant closed at 10:00pm and any guest arriving after 10:00pm were directed to the Bukuom Nite Club.
2. The tables for four (4) in the restaurant that night were signed for by guests in the hotel and the only table for two (2) which was not signed for by guests in the hotel had ordered pork-chops for their meal.

The Court held that it was unlikely that two (2) Alhajis having seen off pilgrims to Mecca would then repair to Continental Hotel and gorge themselves on pork-chops. The witnesses were then committed to Jamestown Police Station to be brought to Court the following day to show cause why they should not be committed to prison for perjury.

The following day, the witnesses were not present in Court. The Court bailiff who took them to the Police Station informed the Court that the Officer-in-charge of Jamestown Police Station had told him that the witnesses had been released on the orders of the Inspector-General of Police.