Renowned Legal Practitioner, Tsatsu Tsikata, says his client, James Gyekye Quayson, was attending to urgent Parliamentary business, hence his absence from the Supreme Court on February 8.
This was in response to a question on the whereabouts of the legislator when a case involving him was called on Tuesday afternoon.
Earlier in the day, when a case filed against the MP was called, the Supreme Court registrar told the court that the legislator had allegedly instigated the assault of a bailiff sent to give him court documents.
This was in the case seeking to restrain the MP from performing Parliamentary duties.
A Cape Coast High Court in July 2021, ruled that Mr. Quayson was not eligible to contest the 2020 polls as he held dual citizenship.
Mr. Quayson, has since been fighting to set aside the matter currently pending at the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court had earlier asked that the court process be served on the MP through the address stated on the case filed by a private citizen, Michael Nimfah who initiated the action against the MP. This address is the MP’s private residence in his constituency.
- Check out Jackie Appiah’s new post after Shatta Wale’s attack
- Good news for physically challenged toll collectors
- Moving bus with 49 passengers onboard catches fire
The Supreme Court registrar said an attempt was made to serve the MP at the address but a caretaker of the place told the bailiff that the MP had traveled and he had no idea when he will be returning.
On the botched attempt to serve the MP in Parliament, the registrar said the bailiff met the MP but he refused to be served and asked his bodyguard to throw the bailiff out of his office. This order, according to the registrar was carried out.
The case was then adjourned to Match 1 after lawyer for the private citizen, Frank Davies said an application for substituted service will be made to the Apex Court if court officials are still unable to serve Mr. Quayson.
In the second case that came up in the afternoon, the MP is asking the Supreme Court to set aside a decision of the Court of Appeal turning down his request that it refers a matter to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
This bothers on Article 94(2)(a) of Ghana’s constitution that says a person shall not be qualified to be a Member of Parliament if he owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana.
After explaining why his client was not present, Mr. Tsikata told the court he was on Thursday, February 3, presented with documents prepared by lawyers for Michael Nimfah.
He argued that he was legally entitled to file a response in seven days. The court adjourned proceedings to Thursday, February 17 for Mr Tsikata to file a response if he finds it necessary.