A High Court in Accra has declined an application by Kennedy Agyapong seeking to dismiss the ȼ25 million defamation suit against him by Anas Aremeyaw Anas.
The Court, presided over by Justice Daniel Mensah, also held that the writ filed by Anas does not in any way violate the constitutional rights of Mr Agyapong as no relevant legal points have been raised to substantiate that claim.
Mr Agyapong claimed that the wearing of a mask and the concealment of his identity breached his constitutional rights under article 33 of the Constitution.
The ace investigative journalist filed the suit against the MP after the latter in an attempt to stop Anas from airing the documentary “Number 12,” which detailed corruption in Ghana football, made allegations of tax evasion, invasion of privacy, blackmail.
Mr. Agyapong in a series of media commentary demanded that Anas must not air the video.
Anas, on June 8, 2018, proceeded to court with a defamation suit, to give Kennedy Agyapong the opportunity to prove the claims and allegations he has been making against him.
Apart from the damages of ¢25 million, Anas Aremeyaw Anas is also demanding costs, including lawyers’ fees.
Mr. Agyapoong on Asempa FM, described Anas Aremeyaw Anas’ defamation suit against him “too cheap”. Mr Agyapong, said he “will pay him [Anas] if I lose in court.”
The Court noted that Anas uses North Labone Crescent while Kweku Baako, who also lives there, describes it as North Labone Estates in a writ he filed in the Supreme Court.
The Court further directed Mr Agyapong to file his statement of defence within 14 days.
Meanwhile, Kennedy’s lawyer, Ralph Agyapong, says media reports suggesting that his client’s application had been thrown out by the court are inaccurate.
The lawyer told Myjoyonline.com that the fact that the judge directed Anas Aremeyaw Anas to furnish Ken Agyapong with detailed address technically means there is no writ served on his the MP.
According to Ralph Agyapong, the Applicant (Anas) is yet to do the corrections on his address within ten days, as the Court has directed, before the writ could be served.
