Assin North MP case: SC to rule on review application April 5
On March 29, 2022, when the case was expected to be moved per the court’s previous orders, Mr.Tsatsu Tsikata, notified the court that his side had filed on the previous day, another motion.
The Supreme Court of Ghana has set April 5, 2022 to rule on a review application filed by lawyers for the embattled Member of Parliament for Assin North, James Gyekye Quayson seeking to overturn a ruling of the ordinary bench to the effect that he had been duly served per the court's order of substituted service.
The application is thus seeking to review the March 8 decision of the apex court which gave the green light for the injunction application filed by Micheal Ankomah Nimfah to be heard.
On March 16, 2022, Lawyers for Hon James Gyakye Quayson filed two applications in the case that is seeking to injunct him from holding himself as a Member of Parliament in Ghana.
One of the two applications is meant to halt the injunction proceedings while the other seeks a review of the March 8, 2022 ruling of the Apex Court.
Appearing in court on Wednesday, March 16, 2022, Tsatsu Tsikata, counsel for the MP, told the court that his side had filed two(2) two applications; one of which sought to halt the proceedings and the other seeking a review of the court’s ruling of March 8, 2022.
The court thus adjourned to March 29, 2022, to hear the applications.
However on Tuesday, March 29, 2022, when the case was expected to be moved per the court’s previous orders, Mr.Tsatsu Tsikata, counsel for the MP, notified the court that his side had filed on the previous day, another motion which sought the court’s permission to file supplementary statement in support of its review application.
He therefore impressed on the court to consider it despite it being filed late but Frank Davies, counsel for the applicant opposed the request noting that it was a tactic to delay the case before the court thus prayed the court not to consider the same.
The court in its ruling granted Mr Tsikata’s motion for leave and duly adopted the same as part of the review application.
When called upon by their Lordships to move the review application, Mr Tsikata however prayed the court for an adjournment to afford him the opportunity to study the applicant’s affidavit in opposition but was strongly resisted and declined by the court thus counsel had to move the application.
MOVING THE REVIEW APPLICATION
In moving the application for review, Mr Tsikata impressed on the Supreme Court to set aside the ruling of the ordinary bench relative to the fact that his client had been duly served per the order of substituted service.
He noted that the ruling committed grave errors which had occassioned a miscarriage of justice.
Additionally, he noted that the substituted service flied in the face of the court’s order because the publication was done only in respect of the order for substituted service by the court.
