Assin North MP, James Gyakye Quayson, has for the umpteenth time failed to halt his criminal trial.
The latest is the High Court’s refusal to refer an issue to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
Lawyers for Mr Quayson represented by Justin Teriwajah anchored this new request on Article 19 of Ghana’s constitution. This provides as follows;
“A person charged with a criminal offence shall be given a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a court.”.
Mr Teriwajah told the court the ongoing day-to-day schedule of court proceedings in view of Mr Quayson’s role as a legislator means he is not getting a reasonable time for his trial.
He also pointed out the prosecution had failed to furnish them with a full complement of documents to be used in the trial.
“Counsel for the accused applicant insisted, there was some outstanding disclosure that had not yet been made.
“The Republica went ahead and pressed for a day-to-day trial of the case despite the protestation of the accused applicant on ground that there are outstanding disclosures.
“In order that his right to a fair trial under Article 19(1) will be followed, the accused-appellant has protested against the opinion of the court.
“Key among them is an attachément pw1 has indicated is available in the statement to the police”, he stated.
The Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame disagreed. He urged the court to dismiss the case.
He explained that the said constitutional provision was unambiguous and did not require any referral for interpretation.
He also pointed out that at no point has the state placed any rival meaning on the said provision. He told the court that the lawyers for the legislator were rather placing an absurd meaning on a clear provision.
“The invitation to you is without basis. The fact that the applicant has an absurd meaning does not mean it merits a referral to the Supreme Court.
“It cannot be correct that an order for hearing on a day-to-day basis raises an issue of interpretation. It also cannot be correct that there has been a filing of all disclosures raises an issue of interpretation.”. He said.
The court presided over by Justice Mary Yanzuh ruled that a case meriting a referral to the Supreme Court had not been made. She asked that cross-examination of the state’s first witness resumes.
Lawyers for the legislator however protested and pointed out that lead counsel Tsatsu Tsikata who has been conducting it was unavailable.
The court initially opted not to adjourn proceedings but later decided to have the trial resume on July 26.
ALSO READ: