Anas defamation suit against Kennedy Agyapong: Defendant seeks dismissal of case

Member of Parliament (MP) for Assin Central, Kennedy Ohene Agyapong has asked the Accra High Court to dismiss the defamation suit against him by investigative journalist, Anas Aremeyaw Anas.

 
Mr Agyapong who is a defendant in the case in which Anas is demanding GH¢25 million in damages and compensation from the MP for defamation, argued that Listowel Bukarson,  Anas’s lawful attorney, is “irregular and  unfit to represent the journalist”.

The investigative journalist sued Mr. Agyapong for defaming him (Anas) on different media platforms, including social media following Anas’s revelation of graft at the Ghana Football Association (GFA).

 

The defendant entered a conditional appearance on July 3, 2018, and argued that the plaintiff failed to provide his own residential address on the writ of summons as required by law.

 

Plaintiff said that it is a matter of general public knowledge and indeed it is “notoriously known that Kofi Baako House, North Labone Cresecent, Accra, indorsed on the face of the Writ of Summons is the residential address of one Kwaku Baako.”

Mr. Agyapong averred that “Anas Aremyaw Anas of whom I have made some justifiable comments in good faith is an adult of substantial means, wealth and assets including a set of residential and commercial property in Accra, and other parts of Ghana and therefore l will contend that he does not reside with the said Kwaku Baako in the said Kofi Baako House, a claim the plaintiff is not expected to deny”.

He said: “That the foregoing is further confirmed by an admission made by the said Kwaku Baako, who has recently commenced a suit in the Supreme Court, Accra, and has affirmatively endorsed in the face of the writ his residential address as Kofi Baako House, North Labone Crescent Accra, the same address which the Plaintiff herein claims he also resides. The said writ is marked and attached as EXH KA3.

Mr. Agyapong said  “Anas’s writ also failed to comply with the requirements of the law, which mandate that in addition to the residential address of the plaintiff, the occupational address is also required by law to be stated on the writ of summons, a requirement which the plaintiff has blatantly violated.”

“That the Anas Aremyaw Anas of whom I and a number of persons have made fair comments and critiqued in good faith had his picture displayed by me on a number of media platforms but, an individual who claims no one can identify him because he appears in public with his face covered in a mask, claimed mostly through the said Kwaku Baako, one of his notoriously known associates, that the said pictures and other photographic images, which I had shown to the public, is not the true image of the Anas I had made a fair comment about.”

BY MALIK SULLEMANA

email
Print Friendly

Leave a Comment