In a writ submitted to the Accra High Court on Tuesday, August 26, 2025, Dr. Abbey is demanding GH¢20 million in damages, citing comments made by Abronye on radio, which he described as false and damaging to his reputation.

According to the suit, Abronye alleged on air that Dr. Abbey carries his own chair from Accra to cocoa farms when meeting farmers. He also accused the COCOBOD boss of deliberately replacing the institution’s Finance Director to misappropriate funds meant for cocoa farmers.

Dr. Abbey rejected the allegations, describing them as baseless and a deliberate attempt to tarnish his professional image.

“The defendant’s statements were made with the intention of eroding the trust and confidence the public has in the plaintiff, fully aware that such falsehoods would cause irreparable damage to his personal dignity and reputation,” the writ stated.

Beyond monetary compensation, Dr. Abbey is asking the court to compel Abronye to issue an unconditional retraction and an unqualified public apology, as well as remove all defamatory remarks from circulation. He is also seeking a perpetual injunction to prevent Abronye, or any associates acting on his behalf, from publishing further defamatory statements against him.

Source: Adomonline

• Ag. Forestry Commission boss files GH¢20m  defamation against Abronye DC

• Joyce Bawah demands apology, GH₵10m compensation from Abronye

Pursuant to the court’s orders, Mr Ankomah published the notice of entry of judgment and penal notice, together with the order for substituted service, in the Saturday, August 2, 2025, issue of the Daily Graphic.

Mr Ankomah won the defamation suit against Mr Taylor in 2020 after the latter accused the lawyer of being part of a plot to discredit and disgrace Nana Appiah Mensah, the embattled Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Menzgold, the defunct company alleged to have been involved in a Ponzi scheme.

Substituted service

Substituted service is a procedure allowed under the rules of court, specifically the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rule, 2004 (C.I.47), and used to serve court processes on parties who have evaded personal service, or when it is difficult to effect personal service.

The order for substituted service was granted by the court, presided over by Justice George Aikins Ampiah-Bonney, following a motion by lawyers for Mr Ankomah, led by Thaddeus Sory.

“It is hereby ordered that the Plaintiff/Applicant has leave of the court to serve the Defendants with the entry of judgment, penal notice substituted by a one-time half-page publication in the Daily Graphic,” the court ordered.

Defamation suit

In 2019, Kevin Taylor, in one of his videos on social media, claimed that Mr. Ankomah was part of a scheme by a Dubai-based minerals firm and some top members of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) government to destroy the embattled CEO of Menzgold, Nana Appiah Mensah, also known as NAM1.

Subsequently, Mr. Ankomah filed the defamation suit on the grounds that the allegation was without basis and a calculated attempt to destroy his hard-earned reputation.

Again, he said, the allegations had caused him “hatred, ridicule, discredit, contempt, vilification, reproach, great distress, and emotional trauma.”

Despite numerous efforts to serve Mr. Taylor, including through substituted service, he failed to attend the trial, leaving the court to enter a judgment in default of defence against the defendant.

The breakdown of the damages was GH¢2 million for general damages; GH¢500,000 for aggravated damages, GH¢400,000 for damages, and GH¢50,000 as costs.

The court also ordered a perpetual injunction to restrain the further publication of the material and asked the defendants to publish an apology within 14 days, as well as a mandatory injunction compelling the defendants to remove offending material within 14 days.

In awarding the damages, the court held that it took into consideration how widely the video was circulated and the malicious nature of the accusation.

It further held that it considered “the insults to the plaintiff by other persons following the publication of the matter (naming some of those persons), Taylor’s “malevolence,” “spite,” and his “reprehensible conduct” and “egregious conduct,” and held that those attitudes “offend the court’s sense of decency.”

The suit, filed at the High Court in Accra, follows allegations made by Baffoe in a broadcast aired online on July 10, 2025.

Baffoe accused Brown of forging official documents and unlawfully authorising the sale of portions of Ghana’s forest reserves while falsely backdating letters to implicate the previous administration.

In his statement of claim, Brown contends that the assertions made on OHIA TV’s programme – ‘The Evidence’ by Baffoe were not only false but calculated to damage his hard-earned reputation, both locally and internationally.

He is demanding GH¢15 million in general damages for libel, GH¢5 million in exemplary damages, and a series of public apologies and retractions to be broadcast and published across major television networks and newspapers. “The statements were made maliciously and without any factual basis,” Mr. Brown’s legal team wrote, adding that the televised accusations implied that their client is “an embezzler, a dishonest and fraudulent person, and a thief.”

Mr. Brown, a trained forester with a PhD in Tropical Forest Ecology, has worked at the Commission since 1993 and has held senior roles including Director of Operations and Executive Director of the Forest Services Division. He was appointed acting Chief Executive in January 2025.

In the 20-minute broadcast of the online television Ohia TV, Kwame Baffoe alleged that Brown had issued official documents in mid-2024—before his appointment—to facilitate payments from mining companies for forest entry permits.

The documents were said to have been dated June and May 2024 and bore Brown’s signature as Acting Chief Executive.

Mr. Baffoe claimed that these actions were part of a broader strategy to tarnish the image of the previous NPP-led administration by linking it to illegal mining deals. “If you backdate a letter to make it look like these events happened under the NPP regime, then you are engaging in forgery,” Mr. Baffoe said during the broadcast. He further alleged that Mr. Brown had collected payments through unofficial means and diverted proceeds from forest reserves into private hands.

The plaintiff disputes all these claims, asserting that at the time the documents were allegedly signed, he had not yet assumed the position of Acting CEO. He also dismissed the suggestion that he had tried to frame the NPP by backdating permits or making any financial irregularities.

As part of his reliefs, Mr. Brown is requesting six televised apologies from Baffoe to be aired on national channels including GTV, TV3, Joy TV, and OHIA TV, as well as printed retractions in the Daily Graphic over four consecutive weeks.

He is also asking for a formal apology to be posted on all OHIA TV digital platforms.

The lawsuit, filed at the Accra High Court on Wednesday, July 23, seeks to counter what Mr. Gyamfi describes as a smear campaign aimed at damaging his reputation.

Afia Schwarzenegger is alleged to have claimed that Mr. Gyamfi has girlfriends at the University of Ghana and has purchased cars and other properties for them.

But Mr. Gyamfi has dismissed the claims as “false, malicious, and deliberately contrived.”

He also denied ever acquiring property in the United States or elsewhere for his wife or a supposed sister-in-law, clarifying that his wife does not even have a sister named “Vida,” as alleged.

He said the statements were calculated to paint him as “morally depraved and without any scruples.”

According to him, the claims have triggered widespread concern, prompting calls and inquiries from colleagues, senior government officials, party members, relatives, and international contacts.

Source: Adomonline.com

ALSO READ:

• Ernest Kumi’s Death: Sammy Gyamfi offers prayers in glowing tribute [Video]

• Sammy Gyamfi did no wrong; haters are just hurt – Francis-Xavier Sosu

Read the full writ of summons below:

The Accra High Court has dismissed Lilwin’s application to suspend proceedings, ruling that the case will proceed in Accra.

The actor had requested a stay of proceedings pending a Court of Appeal decision on whether the case should be transferred from Accra to Kumasi, where he resides. However, the High Court rejected the request and slapped him with a GH¢5,000 cost.

The defamation suit, filed on February 14, 2024, arises from a viral video in which Lilwin allegedly launched a personal attack on Martha Ankomah.

In the video, Lilwin accused the actress of “looking down on Kumawood actors” and refusing to work with them, allegedly due to what she viewed as “poor storylines.” He also cast doubt on her success, suggesting it was due to her connections rather than talent.

In response, Martha Ankomah filed a defamation suit, citing reputational damage.

Reacting to the lawsuit, Lilwin appeared to mock the legal process by posting a video of NDC Chairman Johnson Asiedu Nketia’s infamous quote, “Every idiot can go to court,” suggesting that being sued did not equate to guilt.

The case has since attracted widespread attention, sparking conversations about professionalism and mutual respect in the Ghanaian film industry.

With the court’s latest ruling, the case is set to proceed in Accra, as the legal battle between the two actors continues.

ALSO READ:

• Wontumi’s detention: I have blocked Appiah-Kubi; I won’t talk to him again – Gary…

• Wontumi case: Don’t crucify suspect before charges are filed – Appiah-Kubi to Srem-Sai

Mr. Mahama, founder of Engineers and Planners (E&P), claims that the statements made by Mr. Simons have severely damaged both his personal reputation and that of his company.

The suit, filed on Wednesday, May 28, stems from an article authored by Mr. Simons titled “Ghana Provides a Lesson in How Not to Nationalise a Gold Mine” published on April 19, 2025, on his website, brightsimons.com. The article was later shared on Mr. Simons’ official X (formerly Twitter) handle, @BBSimons, where it amassed over 93,000 views, 250 reactions, 98 reposts, 26 comments, and 109 bookmarks.

According to the plaintiff, this wide engagement contributed significantly to the circulation of the allegedly defamatory content.

In the publication, Simons suggested that E&P was financially distressed due to stalled operations at the Damang gold mine, with creditors “up in arms.” The article also implied that Mr. Mahama, brother of President John Mahama, was benefiting from political connections and receiving undue favours under government mining policies.

Mr. Mahama has flatly denied the allegations, describing them as “entirely false and wholly without factual basis.”

As part of the reliefs sought, he is demanding:

• A declaration that the statements made by Bright Simons are defamatory;

• A public retraction and apology published on the same digital platforms and as a full-page advertisement in the Daily Graphic for six consecutive editions over a three-month period;

• A perpetual injunction restraining Mr. Simons from publishing any further defamatory content about him;

• GH₵10 million in general damages;

• Legal costs and any other relief the court may deem fit.

The case is expected to attract significant public interest, given the personalities involved and its potential implications for free expression and responsible journalism.

ALSO READ:

• IMF targets will be irrelevant by 2028 – Bright Simons warns against exit

• Bright Simons writes: Mystery middlemen surface in Ghana’s gold for oil deals

Below is the statement of claim:

The company is demanding GH₵20 million in damages over allegations of illegal mining and corruption in protected forest reserves.

In a writ filed at the Accra High Court on April 24, Akonta Mining claims that Minister Buah defamed the company during a press conference on April 22, accusing it of orchestrating illegal mining operations in the Tano Nimiri Forest Reserve.

The company denies these allegations, stating that its legally acquired mining leases, granted in 2021, are outside the reserve.

On April 21, the Minister directed the immediate revocation of all mining licenses held by Akonta Mining Company Limited.

This followed serious allegations of illegal mining activities (galamsey) and regulatory breaches by the mining company.

Speaking at a press conference, the Minister disclosed that Akonta Mining had been implicated in a series of unlawful activities, including engaging in galamsey operations and violating established mining regulations.

Mr Buah stated that the company has also been illegally selling concessions within the Aboi Forest to unauthorised miners for up to GH₵300,000, and in some cases, in exchange for gold royalties.

“This company has not only trespassed into protected reserves but has become a criminal syndicate, selling access of the Aboi Forest Reserve to illegal miners for a staggering GH₵300,000 per concession.

“Worse, these illegal miners operate under Akonta’s protection, devastating the River Tano and surrounding forests with impunity,” Mr Buah said.

He continued, “As part of the agreement between Akonta Mining and the illegal miners, weekly royalties of 250 grams of gold are to be paid to the company, lining the pockets of Akonta’s collaborators.”

In response to these allegations, the company in its lawsuit emphasised that it holds two valid 10-year mining leases since 2021 covering Samreboe and Abokoase areas, which are outside the Tano Nimiri reserve.

It added full compliance with all regulations, including payment of $301,000 in mineral rights fees and ground rents.

The company further maintains that there is no evidence supporting the Minister’s claims of encroachment or criminal activity.

On the back of these, Akonta Mining is seeking GHC 20 million in damages for defamation, a retraction and public apology from the Minister, and a court injunction barring further allegedly false statements.

The judgment was delivered by the Cape Coast High Court on Monday, April 28, 2025, although the MP had initially sought ₵1,000,000 in damages.

The court held that the two defendants had published defamatory statements against the MP on the Assinman Politics Gh WhatsApp group platform.

Among other rulings, the court issued a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from further publishing any defamatory statements against Rev. Fordjour.

Additionally, the defendants have been directed to retract the defamatory statements and render an unqualified written apology, which must be published on the Assinman Politics Gh WhatsApp group platform and any other social media platforms where the defamatory statements were circulated.

Below is a summary of the judgment:

ALSO READ:

• Haruna Mohammed explains why Ntim Fordjour declined to cooperate with security agencies

• Ntim Fordjour sat down and concocted suspicious flight claim – Agalga 

The suit, filed at the Accra High Court on Thursday, April 24, 2025, was initiated through their counsel, former Abuakwa South MP, Samuel Atta Akyea.

According to the plaintiffs, Dr. Ayine fabricated a false narrative alleging that they had fraudulently used a corporate account to siphon State funds for personal use.

They are seeking exemplary and punitive damages for what they describe as highly offensive and defamatory statements made by the Attorney General during a press conference held on March 24, 2025.

In addition to damages, the plaintiffs are requesting a perpetual injunction to restrain Dr. Ayine from making or facilitating any further publication or broadcast of similar defamatory content.

“The international and widespread opprobrium visited on the plaintiffs by the defendant has become a continued discussion on media outlets and has affected the young children of the plaintiffs, who are ridiculed and taunted by their mates in school,” the suit states.

They are also demanding costs, including legal fees.

“In the natural and ordinary meaning, the words spewed out to the entire world, of and concerning the Plaintiffs by the Defendant, meant and were understood to mean that the plaintiffs are criminals and fraudsters who have embezzled state funds to enrich themselves. Needless to add that the Plaintiffs are involved in money laundering,” portions of the read writ.

ALSO READ:

• I’ll come out an innocent man – Adu Boahene [Video]

• What if Adu Boahene had 100 houses but legitimately acquired? – Atta Akyea [Audio]

• Deputy AG dismisses claims of prejudice in Adu Boahene case

The judgment by the Superior Court in New Jersey follows a lengthy legal battle over the defamatory statements made by the defendants during a 2021 interview broadcast on social media.

This was during an episode of “The Daddy Fred Show,” a popular online program targeting Ghanaian audiences in the United States.

The victory at the US Court was initiated after the journalist suffered a setback at the Accra High Court in 2018.

Anas had sought GH¢25 million in damages, citing defamatory materials published by Agyapong.

However, the court presided over by  Justice Eric Baah, ruled against Anas on March 15, 2023, stating that his investigative methods resembled “investigative terrorism” rather than legitimate journalism.

On May 17, 2022, another lawsuit was filed in the Essex County Superior Court, accused Kennedy Agyapong and Frederick Asamoah of making false and damaging statements.

The interview, which was streamed live on Facebook and other platforms, garnered over 29,000 views and contained several defamatory claims against Anas.

Anas, an investigative journalist known for exposing corruption and human rights abuses, argued that the defendants’ statements were part of a calculated effort to tarnish his reputation and discredit his work.

The lawmaker accused Anas of being a criminal, a thief, and responsible for the murder of his collegaue, Ahmed Suale, an undercover journalist who worked on the explosive documentary “Number 12.”

The court document claimed that Kennedy Agyapong, during the interview, made several false statements, including:

1. Claiming that Anas was a criminal who had been convicted of crimes in Ghana.
2. Alleging that Anas was behind the murder of Ahmed Suale.
3. Accusing Anas of being responsible for the deaths of multiple Chinese nationals in Ghana.
4. Stating that Anas was a thief.

The court awarded Anas a total of $18 million in damages.

Meanwhile, lawyers for Kennedy Agyapong have applied for remittitur – a reduction in the amount of damages awarded.

The court concluded that what Anas is engaged in is not investigative journalism but rather “investigative terrorism” and that Mr Agyapong was justified in calling Anas “a blackmailer, corrupt, an extortionist, and evil”.

ALSO READ:

• Kennedy Agyapong vs Anas: Supreme Court dismisses Anas’ suit against High Court

• Kennedy Agyapong, Anas lawyer “clash” in court

Terms of the agreement were struck on Tuesday, February 25, after an initial breakdown in negotiations was announced in open court.

Following the agreement, the parties are to file the terms of settlement and appear in court on April 1, 2025, for it to be adopted as a consent judgment by the court presided over by Justice Forson Baah Agyepong.

On Tuesday, February 25, 2025, an initial proposal from Lilwin and his representative to pay GH₵150,000, which includes GH₵50,000 legal fees, was flatly rejected as lawyers of the plaintiff (Martha Ankomah) described it as an “eyesore.”

“We have been chasing the defendant for settlement,” counsel said. “My learned friend (counsel for Lilwin) is here, and I have called her several times just to get something to work with,” but to no avail.

Eyesore Proposal

Counsel said it was only last Saturday that counsel for the defendant (Lilwin) called “to propose something….and what they proposed was an eyesore.”

Nii Applatu Plange, counsel for the plaintiff, said, “In our view, it is not something that we will want to proceed further with, so we are back for the court to proceed with the case,” he said as negotiations for settlement broke down.

Reasonable Proposal

Counsel for the defendant said what counsel for the plaintiff told the court was largely true but stressed that what her client (Lilwin) had proposed was “reasonable.”

She was, however, “surprised to hear (from counsel of the plaintiff that it) is an eyesore.”

In the circumstances, she said, “We are in their (plaintiff’s) hands and the court.”

To clarify matters to the court, counsel for the plaintiff said, “At the last sitting, we (plaintiff and her counsel) came down (from GH₵5m to GH₵2m) significantly, and when my learned friend called, she proposed legal fees and GH₵100,000 for Martha to forgo it.”

This, counsel for the plaintiff said, was unacceptable and formed the basis of his description as an “eyesore.”

We Can’t Afford Martha’s Pedigree

Counsel for Lilwin (defendant) told the court that “We proposed that Martha should receive GH₵100,000 and legal fees of GH₵50,000 (totaling GH₵150,000).”

She explained that, “We are approaching Easter, and I know that the matter is not anything that we can quantify in terms of the injury caused to the plaintiff (Martha Ankomah).”

“We are doing this on the background that we are Christians. …We cannot pay Martha Ankomah for her pedigree,” counsel for Lilwin said as she mitigated for the damages.

Counsel for the defendant intimated that “We are proposing a whopping 1.5 billion (in old currency),” which, for them, is reasonable.

But counsel for the plaintiff also raised concerns about how the new apology that was to replace the rejected one was treated.

Justice Forson Baah Agyepong, the presiding judge who appeared to have had enough of the parties after his previously wise counsel for them to agree on settlement in his chambers, said, “I won’t talk again; I have advised both parties enough.”

GH₵200,000 New Proposal

When it appeared in open court that the plaintiff and her lawyers did not accept the initial GH₵150,000 proposal and wanted the case to proceed in court, Lilwin (defendant), through one of his managers, whispered into counsel’s ear.

Counsel then informed the court that her client had whispered into her ear that he would round the figure up to GH₵200,000, including legal fees.

That triggered a back-and-forth exchange in open court, resulting in the parties approaching the bench. They later agreed to have more discussions in chambers to resolve the matter, but this time without the judge.

After nearly two hours, the parties returned from chambers to inform the judge that they had agreed on terms of settlement.

After consulting their diaries, the parties informed Justice Baah Agyepong that they would be back in court on April 1, 2025, for the terms of the settlement to be adopted by the court as a consent judgment.

It is not immediately clear the final sum in general damages that was agreed on, but the settlement will include a new retraction and proper public apology.

ALSO READ:

Alex Kwaku Tetteh, a businessman, is seeking retraction and apology from Adorye, an Operations Director of Movement for Change, a political organisation, over some media publications.

According to the plaintiff, the retraction and apology should be done with much prominence on Okay Fm, an Accra based radio station.

Additionally, the plaintiff wants the publication of the retraction and apology to be done on the websites of the radio station and all other social media platforms as well as the front or back page of the Daily Graphic Newspaper for three consecutive days.

It is the case of the plaintiff that on or about May 7, 2024, the defendant called into a morning show known as “Ade Akye Abia,” on Okay FM   and allegedly said “…. When he (referring to the Plaintiff) drinks Akpeteshie (a local gin) and smokes ‘wee’ in addition, he speaks total rubbish as if he speaks from his anus…”

Tetteh held that the words spoken of him by the defendant were meant to convey the meaning that he was a drug addict, a criminal, unintelligent and an alcoholic.

“By reason of the publication of the said words, the Plaintiff has been seriously injured in his reputation and has been brought into public scandal, disrepute, odium and contempt…”

He said the false pronouncement by Adorye was not only a live telecast but also streamed live on numerous social media channels belonging to Okay FM and same was published on its website giving the issue “extensive publicity”.

Tetteh said unless the defendant was restrained by the Court, he would continue to make similar pronouncements about him.

He is, therefore, seeking “exemplary damages” and a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant or his agents from further publishing or causing the said defamatory words to be published or distributed.

ALSO READ:

NPP set to present Napo to Asantehene

Mahama-Bawumia pre-election debate unnecessary – Bawah Mogtari

It’s a simple mistake – GBA on CJ’s procedure for requesting…

In a Facebook post on May 14, A-Plus expressed regret for any damage caused to Mr. Zein’s reputation due to false statements made against him.

He clarified that he has dedicated his adult life to advocating for the voiceless and underprivileged in society and would never intentionally harm anyone’s image.

“It may interest you to know that I’ve spent my adult life fighting for the voiceless, underprivileged persons, especially women and children, and minority groups. However, I must admit that I was misinformed on this particular matter. I am grateful to you for the opportunity to apologize to bring finality to the matter,” the post read.

A-Plus acknowledged the distress and damage his false statements may have caused Mr. Zein and expressed his commitment to setting the record straight. He also offered to make amends if needed.

The apology comes after an Accra High Court ruling ordering A-Plus to retract and apologize to Mr. Zein for the defamatory publication made against him.

In December 2021, Mr. Zein filed a defamation lawsuit against A-Plus, alleging that the musician’s use of his picture along with defamatory comments on Facebook was intended to injure his reputation.

The lawsuit sought general damages of GH₵10 million and an order directing A-Plus to retract the defamatory comment and picture through the same medium used for the defamation.

Nana Oye Bampoe Addo, formerly known as Nana Oye Lithur, who served as Minister for Gender, Children and Social Protection under the erstwhile Mahama administration has taken on her ex-husband Tony Lithur, for tarnishing her image in both Ghana and abroad.

She is, therefore, demanding general damages of US$500,000.00 and exemplary damages, US$1 million.

The legal action has resulted from alleged malicious contents of the divorce petition Mr. Lithur filed on May 2, 2018 to put an end to their 27-year-old marriage, which Plaintiff says has caused her reputational damage.

This falsehood, according to Nana Oye Banpoe Addo, has maliciously caused hatred, ridicule and public odium against her.

The divorce petition, which was variously reported by the media, said the Plaintiff was lazy, irresponsible mother, adulterous, cruel and violent person, as well as engaged in acts that contradict her professional ethics as a human rights lawyer.

These claims, Nana Oye Bampoe Addo says has maliciously injured her image.

Nana Oye (Plaintiff) said Mr. Lithur’s (Defendant) claims could be understood that she is cruel and violent philanderer, adulteress, human rights violator, mean and wicked person and unfit to hold public office.

In reference to the divorce petition, the former Gender Minister said her ex-husband accused her, as a human rights lawyer, of an act of cruelty and violence including pouring water, beating, slapping and using her fingernails to harm their domestic staff.

The plaintiff also added that, the claim by her ex-husband that she travelled to South Africa with an intention to buy an investment property between US$350,000 and US$500,000.00 as soon as leaving political office in 2017, could be inferred that she is not only corrupt but also abused her office to steal public money.

The suit, dated April 25, 2024 indicated that “Due to the false averments and publications of acquisition of investment property in South Africa by Defendant, the Office of the Special Prosecutor instituted investigations into corruption and corruption related offences, money laundering and illegal acquisition of property in South Africa against the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff was investigated and subsequently admitted to bail.

“The Office of the Special Prosecutor published a pending case against the Plaintiff and Plaintiff had to engage legal services to defend herself.”

Nana Oye stated that, the Defendant published these defamatory words, knowing very well that it was not true, but with the sole intention to cause considerable damage to and to disparage her reputation.

According to her, the publication of the petition resulted in inundation of phone calls, insults and humiliation, avoiding certain public appearances, and quitting lecturing in some tertiary institutions.

Nana Oye said constantly she has to deal with answering embarrassing questions and humiliating treatments from strangers, associates, friends, family members, foreigners, some members of the international community, international acquaintances and colleagues.

The Plaintiff alleged that, before the marriage went down the hill, the Defendant told her that he will destroy her reputation and would make sure that by the time he was through with her, there will be no reputation for her to cling on.

The Plaintiff, therefore, contends that Mr. Lithur acted deliberately and maliciously in publishing the said defamatory words, which he knew were false.

Furthermore, the Defendant sought to and deliberately published false averments in his divorce petition and reply to annihilate, malign and destroy Plaintiff’s reputation, her professional career in human rights and her public life. 

Meanwhile, Mr. Lithur made the false claims when he knew there was no basis for the said defamatory statements and publications and he knew his averments and publications would be believed by the general public and beyond because of his stature as a senior lawyer. 

Nana Oye is seeking four reliefs; including general damages of US$500,000.00 in respect of libel contents contained in paragraph 8 and 9, and exemplary damages of US$1,000,000.00 for libel contents in the defendant/petitioner’s reliefs.

She also wants a perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant jointly and severally “either by himself and or his assign(s) from further making any averments or publishing or causing to be published, the said defamatory words or similar words.” 

The Plaintiff is seeking a retraction and apology to be published on social media including on Defendant’s facebook wall, the website of LithurBrew & Company, the Twitter (now X) and Instagram handles of Defendant, and all his social media handles and on the website of the Ghanaweb, together with the website of Joy FM, Peace FM and Citi FM.

ALSO READ:

• AUDIO: I’m in love with Oye Lithur – Abronye DC

• Nana Oye Bampoe Addo shows off son on his birthday

The Minister’s action is in connection with an online article on May 7, 2024, which alleged the former and wife, Wilhemina are in court for engaging in ‘land grabbing’ with the assistance of state security personnel.

The land in contention according to the publication is within the Tse Addo residential enclave where the couple unlawfully entered and trespassed.

However, Mr Asiamah has said Mr Asare has portrayed him as a criminal who abuses his office.

“Plaintiff avers that in terms of the comments made by Defendant, pleaded in Paragraph 7 above, the Defendant meant and was understood to mean that the Plaintiff is a criminal, taking forcefully what does not belong to him and the abusing his office as a public officer.”

Mr Asiamah among other things is seeking compensatory damages in excess of GH₵5 million, a retraction and publication of an apology.

“An order directed at the Defendant to publish an apology to the Plaintiff in the following manner; i. By making three (3) publications of the apology on The Law Platform online portal, ii. By making one publication in a national daily newspaper”.

Below is the full statement of claim:

The High Court presided over by Justice Rev Joseph Owusu-Adu Agyemang held that the application lacks merit.

The court also awarded a cost of GH₵10k against Oliver Barker-Vormawor after lawyers of Kan Dapaah asked for GH₵20,000.

The ruling of the court followed a submission from lawyers of Barker-Vormawor that, the National Security Minister, Albert Kan Dapaah exaggerated and coloured his application by the use of words like bribe or bribery.

The Defendant argued that, the removal of those words from Kan Dapaah’s Statement of Claims means there was no case for defamation to claim.

They contended that a private individual cannot bribe a public officer like Kan Dapaah as per his suit.

But lawyers of the National Security Minister opposed the request and urged the court to dismiss the same with punitive cost.

ALSO READ:

• Barker-Vormawor’s application against Kan Dapaah’s ¢10m defamation suit dismissed

• Kan Dapaah’s motion for GH¢10m default judgement against Barker-Vormawor dismissed

Gérald Darmanin said in October that Mr Benzema “has a notorious link” with the Sunni Muslim Islamist group.

The comment “undermines” his honour and reputation, Mr Benzema’s lawyer said.

The Muslim Brotherhood is banned in several countries, including Egypt, Russia, and Saudi Arabia.

Mr Darmanin’s comment in October came after the player tweeted his support for the people of Gaza as “victims again of unjust bombardments which spare neither women nor children”.

Noting his failure to express similar sympathy for the estimated 1,300 Israeli victims that Hamas killed on 7 October, Mr Darmanin said the former French striker was “well-known for his links with the Muslim Brotherhood”.

“We are fighting the hydra that is the Muslim Brotherhood because it creates an atmosphere of jihadism,” the politician told conservative TV channel CNews.

Karim Benzema, 36, who plays in Saudi Arabia and is a Muslim, quickly issued a denial and threatened legal action against the minister for slander.

In his 92-page complaint, reported widely in French media on Tuesday, he says he “has never had the slightest link with the Muslim Brotherhood organisation, nor to (his) knowledge with anyone who claims to be a member of it”.

The former Real Madrid star added: “I am aware of the extent to which, because of my notoriety, I am being used in political games, which are all the more scandalous given that the dramatic events since October 7 deserve something quite different from this type of statement.”

His lawyer Hugues Vigier told French outlet RTL that the footballer is the victim of “political exploitation” and accused the interior minister of “sowing division in France”.

Mr Darmanin is yet to comment on the complaint.

He has previously targeted Karim Benzema for other reasons, including his refusal to sing the French national anthem and his “proselytising on social networks”.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded about 80 years ago in Egypt. It has provided the rationale for many modern-day Islamist organisations, including Hamas.

Primarily an ideological movement with no formal structure, and while it is banned in many countries, it is not restricted in most of the European Union.

The group’s influence in Europe is mainly seen via front organisations which campaign for Islamic causes like the right of women to wear head-coverings.

The surgeon, who was the Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Illegal Mining, has accused Mr Dawone of money laundering and illegal sale of excavators.

Mr Dawone has not taken these allegations lightly, hence the suit to protect his image.

He is, therefore, demanding damages to the tune of GHC 5 million and an order restraining Prof Frimpong-Boateng from further publication of such false allegations.

This comes on the back of multiple suits against the embattled former Minister following the release of the report which revealed alleged involvement of prominent members of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) including some officials at the Presidency in galamsey activities.

NPP stalwart, Gabby Asare Otchere-Darko, who was mentioned in the report, was the first to sue Prof Frimpong-Boateng with a suit from former Manso Nkwanta Member of Parliament, Joseph Albert Quarm, being the most recent.

Read the full writ below:

READ ON:

• Police invite Frimpong-Boateng over galamsey report

• I didn’t leak my galamsey report – Prof Frimpong-Boateng

• Former Manso Nkwanta MP sues Frimpong- Boateng for defamation

Mr Barker-Vormawor has said it will be a free service to the renowned surgeon.

The act, according to him, is in appreciation of the celebrated surgeon for leading the construction of Ghana’s only Cardiothoracic Centre through which his brother’s life was saved.

He took to Facebook to announce the intervention.

Mr Otchere-Darko, who is a lawyer and member of the New Patriotic Party, has sued Prof Frimpong-Boateng for defamation and is demanding GHȼ10m.

This comes on the back of a report which details the fight against illegal mining in the country, authored by Prof Frimpong-Boateng.

Persons cited by the report to have played various roles to frustrate the work of the presidential committee, have all denied wrongdoing and have challenged the author to provide evidence. Mr Otchere-Darko is the first to have sued Prof. Frimpong-Boateng for alleged defamation.

ALSO READ:

• Galamsey report: Gabby Otchere-Darko sues Prof. Frimpong-Boateng

• Through Gabby’s intervention, arrested Chinese ‘galamseyers’ were released – Frimpong-Boateng

Meanwhile, Mr Otchere-Darko also wants him to apologise for and retract his words, as well as a perpetual injunction to restrain Prof Frimpong-Boateng from repeating the alleged offending words.

He also asks for an order for a perpetual injunction to restrain Prof Frimpong-Boateng, “whether by himself, his servants, agents or assigns from repeating similar or other defamatory words” against him (Gabby).

The 11 persons are said to have published and circulated comments deemed libellous against the Member of Parliament.

The Asawase MP is demanding GH¢10 million in damages against the defendants.

Some members of the NDC in the Asawase Constituency, led by the 11 branch executives, issued a Press Statement on March 10, 2023 which contained the said defamatory remarks.

ALSO READ:

Muntaka mourns after being hit with sad news

NDC elections: Group picks nomination forms for Muntaka

Counsel for the defendants declined comments on the development when Citi News contacted him, but said he is working to defend his clients in court.

Scores of people clad in red who say they are his constituents massed up at the court complex in Accra to show their support.

The charged crowd was there to throw their weight behind their MP who is facing contempt charges.

Also present to show solidarity were colleague MPs including Deputy Minority Leader and Ellembelle MP, Emmanuel Armah Kofi Buah; South Dayi MP, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor; and Madina MP, Francis Xavier Sosu.

The General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Fifi Fiavi Kwetey, 2020 running mate; Professor Jane Naana Opoku Agyemang and Edem Agbana among other party faithfuls.

The massive crowd massed up at the entrance of the court to show their solidarity through chanting, singing and dancing.

RELATED:

Rev. Kusi Boateng sues Okudzeto Ablakwa

Don’t use judiciary to gag Okudzeto Ablakwa – North Tongu chiefs

They said they believe the suit is an attempt to intimidate him in the discharge of his parliamentary duties and declared they are solidly behind the MP.

Adomonline.com’s Joseph Odotei was in court and captured some exciting scenes:

When I finally took the decision to sue him a year later, I did not discuss it with anyone because I knew many people would be trying to discourage me from “embarrassing University of Ghana”.

Indeed, the first lawyer I approached about the falsehoods emanating from the Vice Chancellor’s office at the University suggested that it would not be in my interest to be perceived as having turned against the University that I had been so closely associated with for such a long time.

Of course, I did not want that.

Unfortunately, as the falsehoods continued over several months and became more intense, I had no choice but to try to stop it.

At that time, I used to wonder why there was not a single person at the University who could step in and stop the obvious persecution.

I found a couple of people who had tried to speak for me at Academic Board meetings and had been quickly labeled as “Aryeetey’s Boys” or “Aryeetey’s Girls”.

Their punishment was to be harassed needlessly by the University management.

Some of them became very sick and that was enough warning to other people who were thinking of supporting my cause.

Yes, a whole university and all its other stakeholders lost their voices.

No one was interested in discussing openly the new developments with the Africa Integras project.

For many, it was simply a feud between two professors.

But it was not. It was about integrity; the University’s and mine!

I went to court for two reasons:

(1) I needed to prove to the world that I was no criminal and that I had not acted in the way the new University management, led by my successor, was trying to portray me.

(2) I wanted to force an independent assessment of the processes that we went through to develop the three Concession Agreements that I signed for this project.

The more I listened to people at the University and in government discuss the project and related processes, the more it became obvious that they had not bothered to understand the project and were not interested in understanding it.

They were more interested in finding someone to blame for the mess the University was getting itself into daily by refusing to negotiate reasonably with the project developers.

As the University’s situation got worse the greater the attacks on Ernest Aryeetey became.

The source material for the attacks was the report of a ‘witch-hunt committee’ that my successor put together to review the project in March 2017.

The only apparent qualification to be on the committee was a grievance against the former VC.

A reading of the report reflected an extremely poor appreciation of corporate finance, law and university management.

Yet it became the weapon used by my successor. He used it very effectively to convince the University Council, the university community, the government and other stakeholders about my supposed guilt.

They were told about what was in the report and did not assess it against any other relevant facts.

The report failed to consult easily available material on the project and presented pre-determined conclusions to make a case for termination of the agreement.

It was a very unintellectual document, characterized by a strong hatred for Ernest Aryeetey.

Considering the composition of the committee, it was not difficult to fathom why.

All the falsehood that was peddled about the project and about me was inspired by that report.

The Committee simply gave the Vice Chancellor what he was looking for; a reason to terminate the project and embarrass Ernest Aryeetey.

When I attended the burial service of a departed Legon staff member and I heard what the Reverend Minister said during his homily, I knew it was time for me to act.

He said in Fante “This man lying in front of us worked at University of Ghana for many years and we never heard that he had stolen a pesewa from the University.

These days, it is those who have free cars, free accommodation, free electricity, free water, free telephones, etc, who steal millions of dollars.

It is not only politicians who are corrupt; academics can be even more corrupt”.

This was in the week that a fringe newspaper had accused me directly of complicity in a corrupt $64 million deal, quoting extensively from the ‘witch-hunt committee’ report.

The Minister had just seen me walk into the church late. I could not believe that I had become the subject of a homily at a burial service!!!

The last straw that sent me to court was when I heard of what my successor had said about me at a meeting of Convocation on 2nd July 2019.

He was trying to make them believe that I was the worst Vice Chancellor Legon had ever had.

I was the source of all of Legon’s problems. This was after the University had reported me to EOCO with a complaint of “fraudulent collusion” and I had been forced into a self-cognizance bail of US$15 million.

As I sat in the windowless interrogation room at EOCO, it dawned on me that I was not only being deliberately embarrassed; my freedom was being curtailed and my successor wanted to see me in jail for no good reason.

ALSO READ:

Prof Aryeetey wins defamation case against his successor

Former UG Vice-Chancellor narrates how he turned a hall into a night club [Listen]

I was very lucky to find a lawyer who believed my story and saw the persecution I was suffering.

We offered my successor several opportunities to recant his false statements, but he ignored us completely.

We, therefore, developed a clear strategy to prove that his utterances on several platforms were defamatory.

That was easy as the internet was awash with these statements.

It was so overwhelming that he could not have denied them.

We had to show that the statements that he made were false, and that was not difficult either as I had copies of most relevant documents to show the falsehood.

I managed to find a star witness who corroborated the evidence authoritatively and credibly.

There was more than enough evidence from a three-year period of negotiation and project development to establish that this was never a one-man show and that we followed due process.

Unfortunately for my successor, his witness statement was not supported by the documents that he tendered in evidence.

Indeed, his documents rather became a great help to my case.

We also had to show that my esteem had been lowered in the eyes of right-thinking members of society, and the judge agreed that my standing had been affected.

I did not even bring up my experience at the burial service.

After the hearings had been concluded and I read my “Plaintiff’s Written Address” crafted by my lawyer, I became very optimistic about the likely outcome.

It was perfectly written and the logic of the arguments appeared solid to me.

I will recommend the address to any lawyer involved in a defamation case.

In the end, the judge agreed with everything that we said and proved in court.

He granted all the reliefs I had asked for and compelled Professor Ebenezer Oduro Owusu to issue a written retraction of the defamatory statements and render an unqualified apology to me.

He should address this to the members of the University’s staff, the Convocation and the University’s alumni.

This should also be published on the University’s Radio Univers on three consecutive occasions within 21 days from the date of the judgement.

He also issued an order restraining Professor Ebenezer Oduro Owusu from further defaming me or uttering defamatory statements about me.

As I sat in court listening to the judge read his judgment, I struggled hard not to show any emotion.

I guess, in the end the overwhelming evidence had spoken for itself.

The judgment gave me a chance to prove to my grandchildren that their grandfather was no reckless manager and corrupt criminal.

I thank God for ensuring that the truth prevailed in the end.

I appreciate the great work that my lawyer, Kwesi Fynn, and his team did.

They were very professional and thorough always.

I tried very hard not to be a “too-known’ client and I believe it worked out well for all of us.

I appreciate my family and friends, especially Ellen, for standing by me throughout this ordeal.

They prayed with me and for me, and assured me that they believed in me.

I thank my classmates from Achimota and Presec who remained supportive and loyal to me in all those years, always telling me “Don’t mind them; they are just jealous”.

There were a few people at Legon that had the courage to openly defend me and were not afraid to be seen with me.

They know themselves, and I thank them for doing what they could.

The court awarded GH¢300,000 as damages, including aggravated damages, to me.

I thank the court for that and I intend to donate the entirety of the award to charity.

I wish Professor Ebenezer Oduro Owusu well.

I also pray that people who assume any office in Ghana in future will not see it as an opportunity to harass or persecute their supposed or perceived enemies.

I never saw myself as an enemy or opponent of my successor.

I still do not understand what I did to deserve what I have been through.

May be, one day ………..

Ernest Aryeetey Former Vice Chancellor, University of Ghana (2010-2016)

E Jean Carroll alleges the attack took place in a New York luxury department store dressing room in the mid-1990s.

Mr Trump denied the claim and said Ms Carroll was lying, prompting her to sue him for defamation.

Ms Carroll’s attorney did not release details of the deposition, but said it took place on Wednesday.

A civil trial in the case is scheduled for 6 February.

“We’re pleased that on behalf of our client, E Jean Carroll, we were able to take Donald Trump’s deposition today,” a spokesperson for law firm Kaplan Hecker & Fink said.

“We are not able to comment further.”

Mr Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, said in a statement: “As we have said all along, my client was pleased to set the record straight today.

“This case is nothing more than a political ploy like many others in the long list of witch hunts against Donald Trump.”

It is unclear what Mr Trump said during the deposition, or whether he spoke in person or remotely. According to CNN, he participated from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

In a 2019 article for New York magazine, Ms Carroll – a longtime Elle advice columnist – said she had a chance encounter with Mr Trump in late 1995 or early 1996 at the department store Bergdorf Goodman.

She said she was helping him pick out a gift and the two of them ended up in a dressing room, where she alleges that he raped her. She says she was 52 and he was around 50, and Mr Trump was married to Marla Maples.

At the time, Ms Carroll also said she told two friends about the incident. One advised her to go to the police, but the other warned her to keep quiet, saying: “Forget it! He has 200 lawyers. He’ll bury you.”

Mr Trump quickly dismissed the allegation, accusing Ms Carroll of lying to sell her book.

She then filed a defamation lawsuit against Mr Trump while he was US president, saying his comments had harmed her reputation.

Mr Trump’s lawyers tried to delay the deposition, but Judge Lewis A Kaplan of the federal court in Manhattan last week denied the request.

Mr Trump had responded to that legal setback by taking to social media to say “this ‘Ms Bergdorf Goodman’ case is a complete con job”.

More than a dozen women have previously made sexual misconduct allegations against Mr Trump, which he has denied.

Last month, Ms Carroll’s lawyers said she intends to sue Mr Trump a second time under a new law that gives adult sexual assault victims a one-time opportunity to file civil lawsuits even if the statute of limitations has expired.

She plans to file the new lawsuit on 24 November, her attorney said.

This is the latest in a string of legal challenges facing Mr Trump.

Among other cases, he is facing allegations of fraud by New York prosecutors, who filed a lawsuit against him in September, and is being investigated by the Department of Justice for removing allegedly classified government documents from the White House and storing them at Mar-a-Lago.

Mr Trump has denied wrongdoing in all cases.

The case involved a 2019 press conference addressed by Mr Gyamfi, in which he alleged that persons complicit in the infamous kidnapping of the Canadian school girls were linked to the Energy Minister.

According to Nana Baffour, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) National Communications Officer requested an out-of-court settlement.

In this regard, Napo, the lawyer said, directed Mr Gyamfi to donate GHS40K to the Osu Children’s Home in his name and was supposed to offer a public apology on Asempa FM.

However, Mr Gyamfi, the lawyer explained, told the lawmaker he’ll offer an apology but not donate the money.

Going to court he said was, therefore, purposefully to clear his name after Mr Gyamfi declined his conditions.

Speaking on Asempa FM’s Ekosii Sen, the situation he said left them with no option than to proceed to court.

The lawyer stated the lawmaker has instructed him to enforce the court’s judgement and will ensure Mr Gyamfi pays all of the damages awarded.

“He’s also supposed to use the same medium through which he made the allegations to apologise.

“Meaning, he’ll hold a press conference to be broadcasted by all the media houses that picked the first brief,” he added.

When asked who will bear the costs, the lawyer retorted, that’s for Mr Gyamfi to figure out.

Mona, who is a socialite and presenter, was not in court when the judgement was passed.

The court, presided over by Justice John Eugene Nyante Nyandu, ordered Mona to pay GH¢500,000 to Yvonne and also apologise for her defamatory publication about the celebrated actress.

Also, she has been restrained from making any more defamatory comments about the Princess Tyra actress.

In May 2020, Mona in an interview with Neat FM, a subsidiary of the Despite Media Group named an extensive list of Ghanaian female media and social personalities and tagged them “slay queens.”

The “slay queen,” term according to her can be equated to a woman of loose morals, who under the cover of legitimacy engages in prostitution and other illicit activities for sustenance.

In the said interview Mona boldly mentioned Yvonne Nelson’s name among her list of people referred to as slay queens.

MORE:

• Meet NSMQ mistress’ adorable children [Photos]

• Meet Ghana’s youngest graduate who entered university at age 13

• Man found alive in freezer 7 hours after he was mistakenly declared dead

“Yvonne doesn’t show off, but she is a slay because you know the slay queen it entails a lot, we have both showing off and some contacts and people who we know that the things that you do and the lifestyle you exhibit, someone is paying for you behind the scenes,” she alleged.

The statement largely presented Yvonne as someone perverted in a character who engages in immoral and illicit activities.

When Yvonne’s counsel wrote to her to retract her malicious statement and apologise, she refused and rather went on a social media tirade spewing more disparaging comments.

Yvonne then went ahead to take the matter up in court by suing her.

But all the time the case was called, Mona never showed up in court despite her bluff on social media.

According to court documents, she was being evasive when she was being served the writ of summons.

“On the 13″‘ July 2020 the Plaintiff/Applicant herein caused a writ of summons and statement claim to be issued against the defendant praying for the reliefs set out in the statement of claim and the endorsement on the writ of summons.

“My Lord, it became necessary to serve the processes by substituted service due to the evasiveness of the defendant. That on the 8th June 2021 an order for substituted service was granted. That my Lord will notice from the docket that the defendant was served by an Affidavit of Posting dated the 8th of July, 2021. That a search dated 13th of October, 2021 shows that the defendant has made no response to the suit. That accordingly with the rules, we, therefore, pray this court for an order for Judgment in Default of Appearance. Respectfully submitted,” the document quoted Yvonne’s counsel to have said.

The Court, therefore, granted the application as prayed by Yvonne Nelson’s counsel.