An Accra High Court has granted a motion for the prosecution in the trial of James Gyakye Quayson, the Member of Parliament (MP) for Assin North, to recall a witness pursuant to Section 79 of the Evidence Act.
Madam Esi Dentaa Yankah, the Principal State Attorney (PSA), said the basis for the motion was that Latif Oshenu, the fifth prosecution witness in the ongoing trial, during his cross-examination, notified the court of a page that was omitted in an exhibit he had tendered into evidence.
The MP for Assin North is facing five charges: deceit of a public officer, forgery of passport or travel certificates, knowingly making a false statutory declaration, perjury, and false declaration for office.
He has since pleaded not guilty and has been granted bail.
Madam Yankah said the witness sought to refer to the omitted page but was unable to do so.
The prosecution sought for the witness to be recalled so the complete document could be placed before the court, enabling him to refer to it as he had sought to do during his testimony.
She prayed that the court exercise its discretion in their favor, as without it, the exhibit in its current form would be incomplete.
“We submit that the complete Exhibit P is what will enable the trial court to do justice in the case rather than the court referring to a clearly incomplete document, the construction of which might affect the trial judge’s ability to assess the absent page or otherwise,” she added.
The prosecution said a copy of the said exhibit had been attached to the affidavit in support of the motion, bearing in mind that Exhibit P before the court was a copy of the document the witness had tendered.
“We submit that these are exceptional circumstances that warrant the recall of a witness,” she said.
Tsatsu Tsikata, counsel for Mr. Quayson, said: “We indicated in our notice in response what we intend to do. We have not seen the original documents, so we are not opposed.”
He noted that when the State Attorney referred to a clearly incomplete document, that was what they had put in evidence. It was not as if someone had altered the document presented before the court.
The court, presided over by Justice Mary Maame Ekue Yanzuh, said the omitted document was the parliamentary nomination form.
She stated that the prosecution should have attached the original document to the application, as mandated by the rules of the court.
The judge further noted that the prosecution had not followed the court’s orders to provide the accused with certain documents.
“The order is made again so that the prosecution provides the accused with those documents before the next adjourned date on February 12,” she added.
ALSO READ: