Case against Assin North MP is political savagery; the courts must know better – Prof Asare

A private legal practitioner, Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare has described as political savagery the ongoing court case involving the embattled Member of Parliament for Assin North, Member of Parliament for Assin North, James Gyakye Quayson.

According to the United States-based Ghanaian professor, the case cannot be about the dual citizenship of the MP since he filed for the renunciation of his Canadian citizenship in December 2019, one clear year ahead of the 2020 general elections.

This follows Tuesday’s ruling by the Supreme Court which in another unanimous decision threw out an application filed by lawyers for the MP.

According to a report on myjoyonline, this was a review application brought before the Supreme Court by lawyers of Mr Quayson for the court to set aside its March 8 ruling that ordered the legislator to file his defence in a case seeking to stop him from performing his parliamentary duties.

Taking to his social media handle to comment on the ruling, Prof Asare said the processing of the renunciation application of the MP which normally takes 3 months was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic and granted in November 2020.

“The case against the Assin North MP is not that he is a dual citizen. The undisputed facts are that he filed for the renunciation of his Canadian citizenship in December 2019, a full year ahead of the 2020 general elections. The processing of the application was delayed by the pandemic but was granted in November 2020. It normally takes 3 months,” he said.

“The EC inspected his certificate of renunciation pursuant to a letter of 24 November 2020 and cleared him to run for his seat on December 7, 2020. He was elected on December 7, 2020, and duly sworn in as an MP on January 7, 2020. So the case against him is that he did not compel the Canadian officials to process his renunciation application quickly enough such that even if the renunciation became effective before the elections and was accepted by the EC, he must be forced to vacate his post for a bye-election that he is fully eligible to compete in.”

Explaining further he said: “I cannot support this line of reasoning and I reject it. What is the law that is being used to take his seat from him? It is Article 94(2)(a). That law says that “a person shall not be qualified to be a member of Parliament if he owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana.”Notice that this law does not talk about dual citizenship. However, that is a complex issue, for the current purpose, so let us assume it does. The law does not say anything about when this disqualification applies.”

“Is it at the time of filing for the party primary, national election, voting day, or on the first day of Parliament? A high court judge cannot rely on Wikipedia to insert a date into Article 94(2)(a). But even it wants to do so in a petition that calls for setting aside election results, he should be guided by PNDCL 284(20)(d), which reminds us that voters’ wishes must be respected and the ground for cancelling an election result is “that the candidate was at the time of his election a person not qualified or a person disqualified for election.”So the only question the high court judge should ask is that on December 7, 2020, at the time of his election, had he applied to renounce (the subjective test) or if you want to use an objective test had his renunciation become effective?” he quizzed.

“How difficult is this to figure out? Did this same court system not answer an analogous question in the Dr Zanetor case not too long ago? How does this clear error become invisible to the appellate courts? How does the appellate system not see that a high court judge has interpreted “allegiance” and inserted its own dates in article 94(2)(a), disregarded PNDCL 284 20(d), and has applied an objective standard to allegiance, which is a subjective concept?”

“The EC reviewed the Assin North MPs papers, including his renunciation certificate, and applied the law to say he is qualified. Why is this call by the EC not subject to the usual deference that the Courts give to the EC in these matters? Those who want to disqualify him and apparently the courts have set aside section 20(d) of PNDCL 284 and inserted their own deadline in article 94(2)(a). We must do better as a nation! There is just too much political savagery. And the courts must do much much much better!! Is it now the law that the time that Canada (other countries) acts on renunciation applications decides who qualifies to be a Ghanafuo MP?”

“Will Ghanaians be permanently barred from running as MP if Canada passes a law that no longer allows renunciation of Canadian citizenship?”

It will be recalled that the Cape Coast High Court in July 2021, annulled the Assin North Parliamentary elections when it ruled that Mr Quayson owed allegiance to another country other than Ghana at the time of filing his nomination forms to contest the polls.

The MP dissatisfied with the ruling filed a case for it to be set aside at the Court of Appeal. But in court on Tuesday, the presiding judge, Irene Charity Larbi in delivering her judgement ordered that all applications relating to the appeal case before the court concerning the Assin North MP have to be struck out.

He further took the case to the Supreme Court to set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal to strike out his appeal which also affirmed the judgement of the lower court.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has set Wednesday, April 13, 2022, to rule on the injunction application aimed at preventing Mr Gyakye Quayson from performing his parliamentary duties.

Source:  thenewsroomonline.com