The announcement of the vacancy was disclosed in a letter the Clerk of the House wrote to the Electoral Commission of Ghana (EC).
“In the exercise of the power conferred and the duty imposed on the Clerk to Parliament by section 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana (Amendment) Act, 1996 (Act 527), L. CYRIL KWABENA OTENG NSIAH, Clerk to Parliament do hereby formally notify you of the occurrence of a vacancy in the Assin North Constituency necessitated by the Judgement of the Supreme Court dated 17 May 2023 vide Writ No. J1/11/2022 issued in respect of James Gyakye Quayson in the case of Michael Ankomah Nimfah vrs James Gvakve Quayson.
“The Electoral Commission of Ghana and The Attorney-General and request you to take appropriate consequential action as required by law,” parts of the letter.
In the ruling, the apex court barred Mr Quayson from holding himself as a Member of Parliament, citinewsroom.com reports.
Mr Quayson was standing trial for counts of deceit of a public officer, forgery of a passport, knowingly making a false statutory declaration, perjury, and false declaration.
Justice Jones Victor Dotse, Justice Nene Amegatcher, Justice Mariama Owusu, Gertrude Araba Torkornoo, Justice Prof. Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Justice Yonny Kulendi and Justice Barbara Ackah-Yensu declared that Mr Quayson was not qualified at the time he contested the election 2020.
The State had on February 12, 2022, charged James Gyakye Quayson with five counts being; deceit of a public officer, forgery of a passport, knowingly making a false statutory declaration, perjury, and false declaration.
As the trial continued on July 2022, his lawyers led by Lawyer Tsatsu Tsikata questioned the competency of the Prosecution’s First Witness, Richard Takyi-Mensah, a teacher and his subsequent tendering of his witness statements.
But, his objection was overruled by the trial Judge Justice Mary Maame Ekue Yanzu on the grounds that the witness was competent and duly admitted the witness statements and paragraphs.
Dissatisfied with the High Court’s ruling, Mr. Quayson and his lawyers filed a motion at the Supreme Court seeking to quash the decision of the trial judge and order of Prohibition against the judge.