Former Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Mr David Asante-Apeatu has slapped host of the ‘The Seat’, a Twi programme on Net2 Television, Justice Kwaku Annan, with defamation.
The former Police boss has asked the court for general damages for libel and aggravated damages including lawyers’ fees and costs over what he said are defamatory comments made by the TV host on a 16th June 2021 broadcast.
The comments, he said, are injurious to his reputation as a well-known retired IGP of Ghana and a forensic specialist.
In a statement of claim, Mr. Apeatu indicated that Justice Annan suggested during the broadcast that he (the IGP) is a fence for criminals in Nigeria and Ghana and that he harbours and works in cahoots with hardened international criminals to unleash terror on Ghanaians.
“The plaintiff avers that the words complained of are utterly false, products of the defendant’s imagination and were mischievously calculated by the defendant to disparage the plaintiff and to create disaffection for him and to bring him into odium in the eyes of right-thinking members of the Republic and the global community.
“In consequence, the plaintiff’s reputation has been egregiously damaged and he has suffered debilitating distress and embarrassment.
“Further, he has been inundated with numerous calls from professional associates, journalists, social relations and friends and outright strangers, and he has had to answer very mortifying questions,” part of the suit read.
According to the statement of claim, the defendant published the words complained of knowing they were false, or recklessly as to their truth or falsity – having calculated that the benefit to the defendant in his vocation as a TV presenter – by way of popularity and increased viewership base and following as a result of the sensational publication – would outweigh any compensation payable to the plaintiff.
The statement added that the defendant knew that once he made the publication it would be reproduced on the websites of the various media platforms including social media and accessible to countless numbers of persons worldwide.
“The defendant knew and intended that his publication of the words complained of should be so published and/or such publication was the natural and probable consequence of his publication.
“The defendant transmitted and/or caused the publication to be published on Net2’s Youtube and Facebook accounts, which the defendant has left to open access to an unquantifiable number of users globally of the Internet on the World Wide Web.
“Consequently, it can be inferred that a large but unquantifiable number of users have watched and are watching the defendant’s publication of the plaintiff,” the plaintiff stated.
He insisted the defendant was malicious in his publication of the words and was persistent and emphatic as to the purported criminality of the plaintiff.
However, the defendant maintained that the falsehood he was knowingly peddling was the truth.
