Head of Paintsil, Paintsil & Co., Kweku Paintsil

A Lawyer and Managing Solicitor of Paintsil, Paintsil & Company has asserted that the embattled Assin North MP, Mr. James Gyakye Quayson, disobeyed the Cape Coast High Court by not adhering to its order.

A Cape Coast High Court in July, 2021 nullified the election of Mr. Quayson after it found he owed allegiance to Canada at the time of filing his nomination forms to contest the polls.

Mr. Kweku Paintsil said although Mr. Quayson filed a stay of execution against the Court’s ruling, the MP should have obeyed to the order.

Lawyers for Assin North MP, Joe Gyaakye Quayson, filed an application to stay the ruling of the Cape Coast High Court that annulled his election as MP, pending the hearing of his appeal at a Court of Appeal in Cape Coast. During this period, Mr. Quayson continued working as an MP.

But speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile, Mr. Kweku Paintsil said the MP should not have carried himself as such, since the filing of an application for a stay does not operate as a stay.

“He was (disobeying). If the court has made an order, the order must be obeyed and if indeed you have filed an application for a stay of execution of that order, the court ought to rule. You cannot take a license from the pendency of an application of stay as itself a stay of the order to enable you to do things in direct disobedience of the order,” he opined.

Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal in Cape Coast, where Mr. Quayson had sought refuge, struck out his appeal for non-compliance with court procedures.

But the MP once again filed a motion at the Supreme Court seeking to quash the decision of the Court of Appeal on the interpretation of Article 94 (2a) of the 1992 Constitution.

The Supreme Court in a majority 5-2 decision, ruled that Assin North MP, James Gyakye Quayson, can no longer perform Parliamentary duties.

According to the apex court, it will be an indictment in the administration of justice if it does not uphold the subsisting judgement of the Cape Coast High Court.

The High Court’s ruling will be adhered to until the determination of the substantive case filed against him at the Supreme Court.