Former State Attorney Files GH¢25miilion Against Kennedy Agyapong
Assin Central Member of Parliament (MP), Kennedy Agyapong, has been rocked with another GH¢25nillion suit for defamation.
This time, retired State Attorney, Ellen Kwakukume, whom the legislature accused of receiving bribe from investigative journalist, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, to stop pursuing a case against people whose interest he claimed the undercover journalist was serving, has dragged the MP to the dock for the defamatory words he published in the media.
Joined to the suit jointly and severally is his media empire: KenCity Media Limited, Net 2 TV, and Oman FM.
In her Writ of Summons, the retired State Attorney is praying the court for “General damages of GH¢25million for libelous and defamatory words published on Adom FM on the 4th of June, 2018, OK FM-2nd July, 2018, Adom TV-3rd July, 2018, Net 2 TV-4 July, 2018, public screening at Kencity Media Ltd. Madina-28 June, 2018 etc. all to the effect that the Plaintiff demanded and took a bribe in the sum of $5000 from suspects or accused persons in order to badly handle their prosecution and pervert justice leading to their discharge, which publication were also capture in the 1st Defendant’s so called campaign of ‘who watches the watchman'."
Madam Ellen Kwakukume is also praying the court to order for Kennedy Agyapong to an apology and retraction in all the mediums he used for the publication of the defamatory words and for a perpetual injunction restraining the MP or his agents or assigns from further publishing any libelous word against her.
Kennedy Agyapong and the Salis Newspaper, produced a supposed video documentary titled “Who watches the watchman” which sought to project journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas as a corrupt person who demands bribes to exonerate people he had investigated and found to be corrupt.
The sequence of the video suggested that Ellen Kwakukume demanded and received a bribe from Anas Aremeyaw Anas to stop pursuing a case against peoples whose interest Anas was serving.
Mrs. Kwakukume, however, demanded an apology from the MP saying that the impression created by Kennedy Agyapong and Salis Newspaper was false.
It is the failure by Assin Central MP to render the apology that the retired State Attorney demanded within seven days, that has landed him him the GH¢25m law suit.
Anas sues Kennedy Agyapong
In June, Anas Aremeyaw Anas filed a defamation suit against the New Patriotic Party member for 25 million cedis for libellous comments allegedly made by Mr Agyapong. It followed the MP's claims of tax evasion, invasion of privacy, blackmail against Anasand Tiger Eye PI which recently produced an investigative documentary detailing corruption in Ghana football.
Read: Anas files ¢25m defamation suit against Kennedy Agyapong
Read below Mrs. Kwakukume’s letter demanding an apology from the MP:
Re: Alleged Acts of Corruption Leveled Against The Person of Ellen C. Kwakukume by Kennedy Agyapong and Salis Newspaper Limited.
Demand for Retraction and Apology
My attention has been drawn to the following acts and comments made by you Mr. Kennedy Agyapong and The Salis Newspaper:
- Upload and circulation of videos on social media and public airing of said videos at KenCity, Madina on the 28th of June 2018 containing Anas Aremeyaw Anas and me.
- As a prelude to the airing of the video mentioned above and in some further video interviews you granted various media outlets before the airing, you Kennedy Agyapong said that the video shows a public prosecutor, who is deceased, demanding and collecting a bribe from Anas Aremeyaw Anas. You further went on to say that in view of the $5,000 bribe, you alleged I received, I failed to attend court sittings and generally failed to pursue the suit, resulting in the case being dismissed on the 13th of October 2013.
- Captioning and superimposing a voice narrative on the video that seeks to create the impression I was demanding a bribe and conspiring to tamper with the court process.
In the said video I saw portions of a pretrial meeting I had with Anas Aremeyaw Anas sometime in the year 2009 pertaining to the case:
- Mohammed Hafix Abdullah
- Mubarak Seidu
- Prince Kinston Kwame (at large).
I want to provide you with a bit of background information on this case since your investigations were too shoddy even to ascertain if I was alive or not. The said case was assigned to me on or about the 2nd of October 2009 in the course of my work as a prosecuting attorney in the service of the Attorney General’s Department. After a perusal of the docket, I asked for further investigations and after that took the case to court on or about the 11th day of May 2010. The case was presided over by Justice Quist. Three dates were given for a day to day hearings, the 12th, 13th and 14th of May 2010. The complainant failed to turn up in court on all days. It was alleged that the accused persons had threatened him with juju if he shows up in court. Whatever his reason for not showing up, it fueled agitations by the accused persons to be discharged since the complainant had failed to turn up for the start of the case.
To save the case I decided to call Anas Aremeyaw Anas to give his evidence since it was his investigation which led to the arrest in the first place and this information could help our case.
When it got to the tendering of the video he made in the course of his investigation, the counsels for the accused persons raised objections. Arguments were taken by the court on the 23rd of June 2010, 12th of July 2010, 29th of July 2010, 26th of August 2010 and the court set the 10th of September 2010 for a ruling to be given. The court failed to give its ruling on the 10th of September, and the case was adjourned to the 27th of September 2010. The case was subsequently adjourned to these days by the presiding judge, without tangible reasons: 8/10/2010, 18/10/2010, 28/10/2010, 30/11/2010, 18/1/2011, 1/2/2011, 14/2/2011, 21/2/2011, 7/4/2011, 4/5/2011, 18/5/2011, 31/5/2011, 28/6/2011 and 14/7/2011. All without the judge giving his ruling. In all, the prosecution attended court over 20 times on this case. I had finished my case and was waiting for a ruling from Justice Quist. Maybe the delays were the initial basis for Anas to investigate the judicial system later on.
In the interim, I attained the age of 60. I applied to proceed on retirement and handed over the case to another attorney around the end of July 2011 as directed. The 14th of July 2011 was the last date I attended court on this case. I retired at the end of July 2011, over two clear years before your alleged date of the dismissal of the case on 11th of October 2013.
My reply to your allegations of corruption are these: Does this factual narrative of what transpired show I did not want to prosecute the case? Your video to back your claims against me has been edited from a recording of a pretrial meeting that spanned several hours. Furthermore, the narrative and opinions added seek to paint a picture of wrongdoing. In one such narrative, you captioned a scene: “tell me the amount transferred to me” however anyone listening with a clear mind will hear what I actually said. Which was: “tell me the amount transferred to him.” I urge all to take a careful relisten and download copies of the original video. Despite your criminal attempts to doctor the narrative, you botched that part. I thank my God.
I have never had a dollar account. I challenge you to provide proof of that account and even entreat any bank that has my dollar account to provide you with that information.
The allegation that I failed to attend court sittings leading to the dismissal of the case against the accused persons is very false. I retired over two clear years before the said 11th October 2013 that you alleged the case was dismissed because of my failure to attend court to prosecute the case.
My observation is that you deliberately took bits and pieces of the recording out of context to create a very erroneous impression aimed at furthering your campaign against Anas, bolstered by the wrong impression that I was dead and cannot put up a defense.
I demand a public retraction of your allegations and an apology within seven days from the date of this demand. You are entreated to put in as much effort to clear my name as you did in tarnishing my reputation.