32
Menu
News

Supreme Court dismisses Assin North MP’s review in 5-2 majority ruling

James Gyakye Quayson Restrained Assin North Constituency Member of Parliament, James Gyakye Quayson

Wed, 27 Jul 2022 Source: starrfm.com.gh

A seven-member review panel of the Supreme Court has in a 5-2 majority ruling dismissed a review application filed by restrained Assin North Constituency Member of Parliament.

James Gyakye Quayson, through his lawyers led by Tsatsu Tsikata, had moved a motion for the apex court to review its earlier decision regarding a referral they had sought at the Cape Coast Court of Appeal which was dismissed.

On March 9, this year, a five-member panel of the apex Court had in a 3-2 majority decision dismissed his application for Stay of Proceedings.

James Quayson who has since been barred from performing his parliamentary duties, wanted the apex court to Stay proceedings at the Cape Court of Appeal for referral of Article 94(2)(a) for Interpretation by the Supreme Court.

But the Supreme Court dismissed it and said he ought to have first moved that application before the Cape Coast Court.

With Justices Gabriel Pwamang and Agnes Dordzie, dissenting, three Justices Gertrude Torkornoo, Clemence Honyenuga, and Yonni Kulendi dismissed the application by a 3-2 majority.

Dissatisfied with that ruling, his lawyer filed an application for review which was opposed by the lawyers of the respondent Michael Ankomah Nimfah.

In court on Wednesday, July 27, when the enhanced panel of seven with Justice Prof. Henrietta Mensah Bonsu and Justice Prof. Nii Ashie Kotey added to the ordinary panel, the court dismissed the review.

With Justice Agnes Dordzie and Justice Gabriel Pwamang dissenting, the remaining five dismissed it in a 5-2 majority.

According to EIB Network’s Court Correspondent Murtala Inusah, the court said, the full reasoning of the panel would be ready by the close of today (July 27, 2022).

Argument

Mr. Tsikata on July 12, while moving the application raised “jurisdictional” concerns.

Frank Davies, counsel for the first interested party (Michael Ankomah Nimfah) said, no exceptional circumstances have been raised to show that he has caused a miscarriage of justice.

“We submit that the application is grossly misconceived and an abuse of the processes of the court,” Lawyer Frank Davies told the court.

Source: starrfm.com.gh