Tsatsu Tsikata explains why he risked it and turned down AG’s discontinuation of Gyakye Quayson’s case

Celebrated Ghanaian legal practitioner Tsatsu Tsikata, who was the senior lawyer for the recently exonerated Member of Parliament for Assin North Gyakye Quayson, says he declined the magnanimous offer by the Attorney General Dr Dominic Ayine to discontinue the case of his client because he resolved to get an acquittal for the MP to prevent future uncertainties.

Attorney General Dr Ayine, barely two months ago, offered immunity to some Ghanaians standing trial in various courts, including the Supreme Court. That immunity was extended to the Member of Parliament for Assin North, who had been on trial for three years.

The MP was charged with five counts, including deceit of a public officer, forgery of a passport, knowingly making a false statutory declaration, perjury, and false declaration.

After three years of legal battle, and with a Prosecution witness giving evidence at the time the offer of immunity was extended to the Member of Parliament, many expressed surprise when Tsatsu Tsikata refused the deal.

But on the day the MP emerged victorious at the court based on the merits of his case and the legal arguments put forward by his lawyers, Lead Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata, in a statement, outlined why he took the risk to reject Dr Ayine’s offer to discontinue Gyakye Quayson’s case.

The Attorney-General indicated during a press conference on various prosecutions that he had decided that, in the case of Hon. James Gyakye Quayson, there had been an indication from Tsatsu Tsikata, Senior Counsel for Gyakye Quayson, that his client did not wish to have such a withdrawal of the case.

Tsatsu Tsikata further explained the security considerations that informed his decision to refuse the immunity offered by Attorney General, Dr Ayine.

“At the time the Attorney-General was withdrawing the other cases, in the trial of Gyakye Quayson, the prosecution had not closed its case. The last prosecution witness was still testifying. If the Attorney-General withdrew the case at that stage, under section 59 of the Criminal and Other Offences Procedure Code, Act 30, the judge could only “discharge” the accused in respect of the offences. According to section 59(4) of that Act, the accused could, at a future date, be charged again with the offences and would not be able to say he had already been tried and acquitted (“autrefois acquit”).

In contrast, Mr Tsikata explained why other accused persons standing trial in different courts on completely different charges, like the current finance minister Dr Cassiel Ato Forson and social activist Oliver Baker-Vormawor, for instance, accepted the immunity by the Attorney General.

He explained that, “In the other cases that were withdrawn by the Attorney-General, the prosecution had closed its case and the defence had begun testifying. Consequently, upon the withdrawal by the prosecution, the accused were “acquitted and discharged” under section 59(2) (b) (ii) of Act 30, meaning the same charges cannot be brought against them in the future.”

He concluded by saying that “it is in the best interest of Gyakye Quayson that his trial should end with an acquittal and discharge, not a mere discharge which would leave him open to future jeopardy. That is why the defence preferred to make a submission of no case at the end of the case of the prosecution so as to have him acquitted and discharged.”

With the acquittal and discharge, the Member of Parliament for Assin North Gyakye Quayson is now walking a free man and will not look over his shoulders even when a new administration takes over from the NDC in future elections.

Source: myjoyonline.com