The Court of Appeal has dismissed a request by suspended Assin North MP, James Gyakye Quayson to temporarily stand down his criminal trial at the High Court.
James Gyakye Quayson is contesting three out of the five counts of criminal offenses brought against him.
His lawyer, Tsatsu Tsikata, told the Appeal Court that the three charges raised matters of constitutional interpretation which the High Court did not have the jurisdiction to interpret.
But, a Principal State Attorney, Richard Gyenbiby, told the Court that all the charges brought against the embattled Member of Parliament did not raise any constitutional matters requiring interpretation.
Reading the ruling of the Panel, President of the Court, His Lordship Henry Anthony Kwofie, said James Gyakye Quayson failed to persuade in demonstrating that there were some exceptional circumstances warranting the stay of the criminal trial.
James Gyakye Quayson, has gone back to the Court of Appeal to file a stay of execution of the court’s decision to strike out his earlier appeal against a judgement delivered by the Cape Coast High Court nullifying the 2020 parliamentary election held in the area.
Mr. Quayson, has also filed another motion seeking to have his appeal, which was struck out, re-listed by the Court of Appeal at Cape Coast.
It came days after the Supreme Court, in a 5-2 Majority decision on Wednesday, restrained Quayson from carrying himself out as the Member of Parliament for Assin North.
The Supreme Court had explained that its indefinite restraint of James Gyakye Quayson, as Assin North MP, was to protect the constitution and the sovereign will of Ghanaians without subverting it, until a case challenging the legislator’s eligibility is determined.
Mr. Quayson in his writ, also explained that failure to put a hold on the decision of the Court of Appeal which will directly affect the High Court judgement, will “not only occasion an irreparable injustice and damage to the people of the Assin North Constituency and the Applicant, but would also lead to the 2nd Respondent [Electoral Commission] having to expend significant financial resources in organizing a by-election.”
