Darling FM - Logo
Home Local News Supreme Court adjourns Gyakye Quayson’s case to May 17
Local News

Supreme Court adjourns Gyakye Quayson’s case to May 17

10th, May 2022 / Local News / Kofi Owusu Opabene
Darling FM - Supreme Court adjourns Gyakye Quayson’s case to May 17

The Supreme Court has adjourned to next Tuesday, May 17, 2022, James Gyakye Quayson’s application for the Court to reconsider the decision barring him from working as a Member of Parliament.

 

 

The court, in a 5-2 majority ruling last month, stopped Mr. Quayson from holding himself out as the Member of Parliament for Assin North saying it had a duty to protect the sanctity of the constitution.

 

 

This decision however split public opinion with dissenting views questioning the apex court’s position of the right of the Assin North people to representation while others argued that the Supreme Court was not the appropriate platform for the order.

 

Though no reasons were assigned for the adjournment, the court registry announced to the waiting courtroom that May 17 was the new date for the hearing.

 

The injuncted Assin North MP filed an application for a review of the Supreme Court’s judgement, restraining him from holding himself as a Member of Parliament or performing any parliamentary duty.

 

The embattled legislator through his lawyers on Tuesday, April 26, 2022, filed the application, arguing, among other things, that the court’s April 13, 2022 decision “was in patent and fundamental error and violated article 129(3) of the Constitution.”

 

He said the decision of the court failed to appreciate that the suit was in reality an attempt to enforce the decision of the High Court disguised as an invocation of the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

“The majority decision was in patent and fundamental error in granting an order of interlocutory injunction pending the determination of the suit when what the Applicant was seeking by this application was for the execution of decisions in the courts below and this error occasioned a gross miscarriage of justice against the 1st defendant/respondent,” he added.

 

 

Source: citinewsroom