Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo has voiced her apprehensions regarding the behavior of Assin North MP James Gyakye Quayson when submitting documents to the Supreme Court.

She noted that he frequently fails to appear in person and instead instructs one of his lawyers to file and swear to statements on his behalf.

The Chief Justice expressed her concern, emphasizing that such conduct is irregular and should not be promoted or encouraged.

“He doesn’t treat this court properly. He engages this court, and he refuses to appear. When you ask the court to exercise discretion, you must treat the court properly” she stated.

Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo made the comment while presiding over a five-member panel during a case filed by the Assin North legislator.

Mr. Quayson was seeking to halt his trial, arguing that the High Court made an error in refusing a request to compel prosecutors to provide certain documents they had failed to disclose.

Attorney General Godfred Yeboah had informed the High Court that his office had already supplied all documents to the legislator. He referred to correspondence between his office and Mr. Quayson's legal team, which indicated that the documents in question had been examined by the latter.

However, Mr. Quayson's lawyers disagreed with this assertion, stating that the AG cannot rely on those correspondences as they had not filed an appropriate response.

As a result of the disagreement, the High Court ruled against Mr. Quayson's view, prompting his legal team to approach the Supreme Court.

During the Supreme Court proceedings, Mr. Quayson's lawyer, Justin Teriwajah, urged the apex court to overturn the High Court's decision. He argued that by relying on the correspondence, the High Court had used evidence that was not properly presented to it.

“Our submission is that, in the main trial, evidence is taken on oath, in a determination of a motion, it must be based on evidence given on oath. Our position is that if facts are deposed, the opposing side has the option to respond. That wasn’t the case,” he said.

The Attorney General held a different viewpoint, highlighting several issues with the processes filed by Mr. Teriwajah at the Supreme Court. Firstly, he pointed out that the processes were irregular as Mr. Teriwajah had sworn an oath and signed the documents without demonstrating that he had the authority of the MP to do so.

Furthermore, the Attorney General emphasized that Mr. Quayson's legal team had been given ample opportunity to extensively argue the matter and had addressed the court on the correspondence between the parties.

According to the Attorney General, there was no evident error of law on the face of the record, as alleged by the MP's legal team, to justify the Supreme Court overturning the decision of the lower court.

“Substantively, we submit that there is no error of law patent on the face of the record. An application invoking your jurisdiction must indicate matters which are patent.

“Where the court has to go beyond the depositions and fundamental attachments, clearly, that application does not properly invoke the supervision jurisdiction.

“It was an application for further disclosure. The application is improper and should be dismissed,” he stated.

The court ruled that the High Court committed no error of law.

“We have examined the processes and find no merit in the application. We find that the applicant was heard by the court and the court had jurisdiction to rule on the matter,” the Chief Justice ruled.

Some panel members had earlier commented on the absence of the Legislator and on his lawyers swearing documents on his behalf.

“Supposing we want to have him cross-examined, you will disqualify yourself from counsel. You depose to affidavit and you appear before us as counsel.

“That practice was because your client has money, he sends you to the court. One day, when your wig is taken off, you will see,“ Justice Issifu Amadu Tanko said.

The Chief Justice additionally added that such conduct does not help the profession.

“This practice demeans the profession,” she stated.

The case was heard by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo and Justices Issiufu Amadu Tanko, Emmanuel Kulendi, Samuel Asiedu and Ernest Gaewu.