Adamu Daramani Sakande
An application by Adamu Daramani Sakande, the Member of Parliament (MP) for Bawku Central at the Court of Appeal for stay of proceedings at the High court pending an appeal has resumed.
The application seeks to stay the trial of the MP in connection with perjury to enable him appeal against the ruling of the High Court judge, Justice Charles Quist which has given the state the go-ahead to call a witness after the MP’s evidence if it so wished.
However the matter could not be heard because the Appeals Court was not duly constituted and the case had to be adjourned sine die.
Rexford Wiredu, State Attorney and the MP as well as his lawyer, Yoni Kulendi were in court.
Both parties were called to the judge’s chambers where they stayed for about 10 minutes before leaving the courtroom.
In the substantive trial of the MP at the High Court in connection with perjury, Mr. Kulendi, at the last hearing made a verbal application for stay of proceedings at an Accra High Court pending the final determination of his appeal and it was refused.
The trial judge, Justice Charles Quist stated that the application was not formally before him though he had been notified by the High Court registrar of the pendency of the matter at the Court of Appeal.
According to him, in summary trials the judge has the discretion to decide whether or not to grant a stay based on issues such as the stage of the trial among other considerations and said he would not stay the trial.
He however said the Bawku MP had the right to appeal.
Earlier Mr Rexford Wiredu, the principal state attorney told the court that the appeal by the MP was premature because it remains to be seen if the state would call a witness so the accused person should have waited until that time to appeal.
He said the accused person had not even closed his case but was concerned about the new witness the prosecution would bring to testify.
The state attorney said he saw no reason why the case should not go proceed and prayed the court to continue the hearing.
Mr. Kulendi noted that he would not respond to the statement of Mr. Wiredu but prayed the court to, in the interest of justice, stay proceedings for them to go on an appeal.
The MP has appeared before the Court of Appeal over Justice Quist’s decision to allow the state time to call another witness if it they so wished.
He has filed an application for stay of proceedings at the Fast Track High Court till the final determination of an appeal he has filed on the issue.
The MP believes that once the ruling had to do with being compelled to identify a document he did not know anything about, the judge should have stuck to that.
At the Court of Appeal where the application for stay of proceedings was to be heard, the principal state attorney, Rexford Wiredu said, “I did not file an affidavit in opposition because I was out of jurisdiction” and raised a preliminary objection which he said would affect the content of the application filed by the MP.
The court, presided over by S.E. Kanyoke, told Mr. Wiredu to file his objection since it was a court of record. Mr. Kulendi on the other hand said the Attorney-General’s office was served with the motion.
Even though the state attorney admitted their office was served he said the Director for Public Prosecutions was not around at the time and explained that he was not served.
Furthermore he said the motion came with a court list and that was how he got to know he was to appear in court, adding that it had no date.
Mr. Kulendi said the application was originally endorsed with a date so it was not possible for him to object because the motion had no date.
He said counsel for the accused person, Mr. Yoni Kulendi should have filed the application at the High Court but not at the Appeals Court in accordance with CI (19) Section 28.
However the trial Justices, S.E. Kanyoke, Aduana Osei and Dennis Adjei pointed out to the state attorney that under CI (19) Section 27 a lower court cannot stay its own proceedings and explained that it was only in a case where an application for stay of execution had been filed that a court could stay its own execution.
Mr. Kulendi prayed the court to dismiss the objection because it had no legal basis to which the state attorney said he wanted it to be on record.
The court ordered Mr. Wiredu to file his affidavit in opposition within seven days. The High Court trial has been adjourned to October 12, 2011.
By Fidelia Achama