Gyakye Quayson files for review of SC injunction ruling

Google search engine

The Member of Parliament for Assin North James Gyekye Quayson has filed for a review of the Supreme Court ruling that stopped him from carrying himself as a lawmaker.

In his view, the ruling was full of errors.

He said in his review application that “The majority decision was in patent and fundamental error and violated article 129(3) of the Constitution in assuming jurisdiction over the determination of the validity of a Parliamentary election and proceeding to grant the application for interim injunction.

“b. The majority decision was in patent and fundamental error in failing to appreciate that the suit was in reality an attempt to enforce the decisions of the High Court disguised as an invocation of the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

“c. The majority decision was in patent and fundamental error in granting an order of interlocutory injunction pending the determination of the suit based on a High Court judgment and an earlier High Court interlocutory decision both of which, on their face, violated article 130(2) of the Constitution and, in the case of the judgment, also violated section 20(d) of the Representation of People’s Law, 1992, PNDC Law 284.

“d. 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.

“e. The majority decision was in patent and fundamental error in granting an order of interlocutory injunction pending the determination of the suit when the Applicant failed, prima facie, to demonstrate a legal or equitable right that ought to be protected by the court, thereby occasioning a gross miscarriage of justice against the 1st defendant/respondent.

“f. The majority decision violated article 296(a) and (b) of the Constitution in exercising discretion unfairly and unreasonably.

“g. The decision to proceed with the hearing of application for the interim injunction brought under the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules C.I. 47 prior to the preliminary objection raised by the Applicant herein was per incuriam the binding precedents of Koglex v. Attieh [2003-2004] 1 SCGLR 75 and Ampofo v. Samanpa [2003-2004] 2 SCGLR 1155.”

The apex court by a majority decision of 5-2 on Wednesday, April 13, 2022, ordered him to stop holding himself as a lawmaker.

Justices Agnes Dordzie and Nene Amegatcher dissented while Prof. Henrietta Mensah Bonsu, Mariama Owusu, Gertrude Torkornoo, and Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi voted in favour.

A Cape Coast High Court, presided over by Justice Coram Kwasi Boakye, had earlier ruled that Mr Gyakye Quayson was not eligible to contest the December 7, 2020, Parliamentary Elections because he bore dual citizenship before picking nomination forms from the Electoral Commission, Ghana (EC).

Fresh elections were, as a result, ordered to be conducted while Mr Gyakye Quayson was asked to cease holding himself as MP.

But the man accused of having Canadian and Ghanaian citizenship allegedly goes to Parliament to join in proceedings.

By Laud Nartey|3news.com|Ghana

Google search engine