“Travesty of justice” – Mahama flays Supreme Court over Assin North ruling

Former President John Dramani Mahama has disagreed with the Supreme Court’s latest ruling against the embattled Member of Parliament for Assin North, James Gyakye Quayson, barring him from going to Parliament as a lawmaker.

Mahama said the verdict by the Supreme Court “is a travesty of justice and an affront to our democracy.”

The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday (13 April 2022) that Quayson, whose position as an MP has been in dispute since he assumed his seat in January 2021, cannot represent his constituency in the Central Region.

The seven-member panel presided over by Justice Jones Dotse reached a 5:2 majority decision to injunct Quayson, whose position as an MP has been in dispute since he assumed his seat in January 2021, from going to Parliament.

However, in a Facebook post on Thursday (14 April), Mahama said “I cannot understand how an MP can be restrained from carrying out his duties when the substantive case to give finality to the question of his legitimacy has not been determined.”

“Or is it the case that the outcome of the substantive case has been predetermined against him?”

He added: “The representation of the people is at the heart of our democracy. Any decision that denies the citizenry of representation is a travesty of justice and an affront to our democracy.”

Justices Jones Dotse, Mariama Owusu, Gertrude Torkornoo, Henrietta Mensah-Bonsu and Yonny Kulendi were the five Supreme Court judges who granted the injunction application, while Justices Agnes Dordzie and Nene Amegatcher dissented.

“The MP is restrained from holding himself as MP for Assin North and restrained from attending Parliament to conduct business on behalf of Assin North,” the presiding judge ruled.

Quayson, in spite of a high court judgment that declared his election as an MP in the 2020 parliamentary election unconstitutional, continued to hold himself as a Member of Parliament and was seen attending sittings of the House and carrying out his parliamentary duties.

Displeased with his actions, the petitioner in the high court action, Michael Ankomah-Nimfah, filed an application at the Supreme Court seeking an order to injunct Quayson. He also sought an interpretation of Article 94 (2a) of the 1992 constitution of the republic, which states that “a person shall not be qualified to be a member of Parliament if he – (a) owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana”.

The injunction order of the Supreme Court will remain in force until the final determination of the application seeking interpretation of Article 94 (2a).

Source: Daily Mail GH