Court throws out Anas’ GHC25m defamation suit against Ken Agyapong

The Accra High Court has dismissed the 25 million defamation suit against a member of Parliament for Assin Central, Kennedy Ohene Agyapong brought by investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas.

According to the 3news.com the judge, Justice Eric Baah is of view that hat Anas Aremeyaw Anas did not prove Ken Agyapong defamed him by airing the documentary – “Who watches the watchman” – but rather, the documentary exposed shady deals that Anas and his associates were involved in.

The Assin Central Member of Parliament (MP) has been facing a GH¢25 million suit from Anas over some comments he (MP) had allegedly made against the investigative journalist in public after airing his investigative piece #Number 12, which exposed some rots in Ghana Football.

Background

Sometime in 2018, the ace international investigative journalist, Anas Aremeyaw Anas dragged the Member of Parliament (MP) for Assin Central, Mr Kennedy Ohene Agyapong, to court for defaming him.

Anas was asking the High Court to award aggravated damages to the tune of GH¢25 million arising from defamatory materials published by the MP.

He said the MP had been publishing materials in his bid to discredit him after releasing an explosive piece on the rot in Ghana football.

Displeased with the MP’s actions, Anas, through his lawyer, Mr Kissi Agyebeng, sued Mr Agyapong for the award of general damages for defamation in the defendant’s publications.

A journalist, Mr Listowell Yesu Bukarson, has been granted the lawful attorney to stand in for Anas.

Publications

The publication complained of are May 29, 2018, live programme in Twi on Adom TV, where Mr Agyapong categorically stated that Anas was a blackmailer, corrupt, an extortionist and evil.

According to the statement of claim, the defendant, in a similar manner, published defamatory words on May 31, 2018, via Oman FM, a private radio station owned by the defendant.

The statement of claim also stated that the defendant published more defamatory materials against the plaintiff via other platforms to the extent of releasing pictures purported to be those of the investigative journalist in his bid to blow the latter’s cover.