James Gyakye Quayson
An attempt by the embattled Member of Parliament for Assin North, James Gyakye Quayson, to temporarily halt his trial while he pursues an interlocutory appeal at the Court of Appeal was yesterday dismissed by an Accra High Court.
The court, presided over by Justice Mary Yanzuh, in a ruling indicated that the application did not raise any special circumstances to warrant staying the proceedings to allow him pursue the appeal.
The trial judge said she was unable to agree with the submission that the appeal would be rendered negatory if the proceedings are not stayed, an argument canvassed by counsel for the accused.
Mr. Quayson has been charged, among others, for deceiving the Ministry of Foreign Affairs by making a false statement that he did not have a dual citizenship in order to acquire a Ghanaian passport.
He has been charged with five counts of deceit of public officer, forgery of passport or travel certificate, knowingly making a false statutory statement, perjury and false declaration of office.
Mr. Quayson, who won the Assin North by-election after the Supreme Court booted him out of Parliament, could be sent to prison for up to ten years if found guilty of perjury, a second degree felony, as the prosecution pushes to establish his guilt.
The trial court on June 16, 2023, ruled that it would from June 20, 2023, hear the case on daily basis following a request by the Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame.
But lawyers for Mr. Quayson filed a review motion asking the court to reconsider the decision, particularly urging the court to adjourn the case to days that do not include June 22 and 23 to allow him adequate time to prepare for the Assin North by-election, which he won.
The court, in its ruling, turned down the motion indicating that adjournments are at the discretion of the court and not the convenience of parties, and that its decision was clearly within the law and no case had been made to show that the order was contrary to law.
It was this ruling that lawyers for Mr. Quayson are challenging at the Court of Appeal, and subsequently filed an application for stay of the trial pending the determination of the appeal.
Moving the motion last Thursday, Tsatsu Tsikata, lead counsel for Mr. Quayson, indicated that a refusal by the court to stay the trial would convey the impression it has predetermined the outcome of the appeal.
He said there is an exceptional circumstance for the court to stay proceedings pending the determination of the appeal, especially when the decision could lead to an innocent person being unjustly tried.
He added that the court continuing to hear the case would prejudge the issues of the right of fair trial, right to be presumed innocent, as well as the limit on discretionary power that are part of the appeal.
Mr. Tsikata, in making his case, played an audio in which President Akufo-Addo made alleged prejudicial comments at a campaign ground about Mr. Quayson in the build up to the June 27 by-election in Assin North.
He argued that the comment by the President violates the right of the accused person to fair trial.
AG Opposes
The application was opposed by Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame, who argued that the application was grounded on irrelevant matters and distorted facts, grossly incompetent and ought to be dismissed.
He said the motion for variation filed by counsel for accused about the day-to-day trial made reference to the court not including June 22 and 23 to allow him adequate time to prepare for the by-election, hence it was unnecessary to file the appeal after June 23, 2023.
He described the appeal as a complete waste of the Court of Appeal’s time.
He added that the application for stay is a bundle of confusion grounded on distortion and must be rejected by the court.
Touching on the alleged prejudicial comment made by the President, Mr. Dame argued that it was completely unjust and an attempt to deliberately distort the fact by selecting only 15 seconds of the President’s speech which in any case does not amount to any prejudice against the accused.
It was the Attorney General’s view that the full video should have been played to give the court a proper context of the President’s comments.
Ruling
Justice Yanzuh, in her ruling, held that there is no rule that binds the court to stay proceedings merely because an appeal has been filed against its decision, indicating that the power of the court to stay proceedings is discretionary and the discretion is not to be exercised arbitrarily and capriciously but in accordance with due process.
She said the application for variation was to adjourn the case beyond the by-election to allow the accused time to campaign, and the by-election has been conducted and the accused won and has been sworn in.
She said she did not see how the success of the appeal would be rendered negatory by this application.
Justice Yanzuh also held that she did not see the irreparable damage the accused would suffer if the proceedings are not stayed, as the appeal is not to determine whether the accused should stand trial.
The judge also held that she did not see how the decision not to stay proceedings would amount to the denial of fair trial.
Justice Yanzuh finally held that the court does not concern itself with what was said somewhere else, instead the court only considers issue before it and the evidence led.
She, therefore, dismissed the application to stay proceedings and adjourned the trial to July 14, for continuation of cross-examination of the prosecution’s first witness.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak