Spread the love

Former President John Mahama has expressed his reservations over the Supreme Court ruling which stops Assin North MP Gyakye Quayson.

The Apex court in a 5-2 ruling Wednesday granted the application by plaintiff Michael Ankomah Nimfah.

In a post on Facebook, Mr Mahama said “I cannot understand how an MP can be restrained from carrying out his duties when the substantive case to give finality to the question of his legitimacy has not been determined.

“Or is it the case that the outcome of the substantive case has been predetermined against him? The representation of the people is at the heart of our democracy. Any decision that denies the citizenry of representation is a travesty of justice and an affront to our democracy.

Meanwhile, lawyer for the petitioner in the case Frank Davis, says the Supreme Court could not have allowed the MP to breach the Constitution.

Speaking to the Media after the Supreme Court ruling on Wednesday, April 13, 2022, Mr. Davis indicated that Mr. Quayson was engaged in an illegality by carrying himself as MP.

Background

The Supreme Court had on March 8, 2022, ordered the legislator to file his defence in the case after in a 6-1 ruling.

The apex court had held that, the MP has been sufficiently given notice of the case against him.

It was the contention of Mr Tsikata that, the seven days period given by the court for the Daily Graphic’s publication as per the orders in a substituted had not elapsed.

The Supreme Court said, the postings of the proceses in his house and notice boards of High Court and Supreme are enough to bring the matter to the attention of the MP regardless of the publication in the Graphic.

Orders

The panel on February 22, directed that court processes be brought to the attention of the MP through a publication in the Daily Graphic newspaper and posting on the wall of the Supreme Court in Accra, the High Court in Cape Coast and the residence of the MP.

This was after the plaintiff through his lawyers filed the case against the MP, told the court all attempts to give the MP court documents have proved unsuccessful.

After hearing the parties, the court said, “We agree to adjourned to 29 and hear the review motion panel to be constituted by the CJ and depending on the outcome, the substantive interlocutory injunction will be heard.


Spread the love