Quayson’s criminal trial: Judge “counsels” lawyers over abusive language

Justice Mary Maame Ekue Yanzuh, the judge presiding over the forgery and criminal case against James Gyakye Quayson, today (June 21) advised both counsels for the state and the accused persons to desist from the use abusive language in their arguments.  

The Court was set to hear a motion filed by the accused person to have the case heard after the Assin-North by-election. 

When the case was called, Lawyer for Quayson, Tsatsu Tsikata notified the court about a supplementary affidavit filed in support of the substantive motion. 

The supplementary affidavit, according to Quayson’s lawyers contained series of information on the Attorney-General and Minster of Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame, which alleges that the current A-G was engaged in a pattern of behavior and utterances seeking to prejudice criminal mattesss before the court. 

But Mr Dame urged the Court not to allow the supplementary affidavit on grounds that it had no legal basis,  unconnected and irrelevant. 

Again, the A-G argued that Quayson’s lawyers ought to have sought permission from the court before filing the supplementary. 

Reacting to the arguments raised by the A-G, Mr Tsikata said in his 57 years as a student of the law, he has never seen an A-G  made some of the remarks allegedly made by the Attorney-General.

The actions of the A-G, Mr Tsikata said was in breach of the professional conduct and etiquette of the legal profession. 

The A-G, who was not happy about the line of arguments, abruptly interjected Mr Tsikata to draw the court’s attention to insults rained on him by other lawyers 

But the presiding judge who eventually dismissed the A-G’s argument not to allow the supplementary affidavit said, “No more abusive language or subtle abuse”. 

She said the supplementary would be allowed on grounds that counsels for Quayson had sought to raise relevant issues to elaborate utterances they were alleging the had A-G made against their client. 

The judge added that due to the nature and urgency of the matter, it would allow the supplementary affidavit.

SOURCE: GraphicOnline

leave a reply