Nana Otieku Amoah Asare III v. The Honourable Attorney General
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- JUSTICE DANIEL MENSAH
Areas of Law
- Defamation Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The plaintiff, Chief of Apaaso, sued the Attorney General for defamatory statements in the Auditor General’s Report that erroneously listed payments of GH₵10 Million each to Apaaso and Ahamadi. This led to accusations of embezzlement against the plaintiff. The court held that the plaintiff had been defamed and suffered as a result, awarding GH₵200,000 in damages but denying the request for a correction order since the error had already been corrected.
Plaintiff’s claim is against the Honorable Attorney General (as the nominal defendant) for: a. GH₵1, 000, 000. 00 being damages for pain, suffering and harassment suffered by plaintiff as a result of the fraudulent materials contained in the Auditor General’s Report dated 31st December, 2010. b. An order of the Court compelling the Auditor General to publish forthwith a correction of the true state of affairs.
Per the statement of claim filed by the plaintiff, the following facts emerged: The plaintiff is the incumbent Chief of Apaaso which includes Ahamadi whiles theDefendant is the Chief Legal Advisor of the Government of Ghana and also advisorin that capacity to both the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning and theAuditor-General of the Republic of Ghana.
The plaintiff has been the incumbent Chief of Apaaso, at the time he issued thiswrit, for the past 19 years without blemish.
The plaintiff says that on the 31st day of December, 2010 the Auditor-Generalpublished an Annual report showing how money belonging to the state had beendisbursed in the previous year.
Contained in this report on both items 28 and 2thereof was the fact that on amount of GH₵10 Million each had been paid on the25th day of February, 2010 to both Apaaso and Ahamadi respectively.
As a result, the plaintiff’s subjects at Apaaso and Ahmadi who had become awarethat the plaintiff had been pursuing claim for compensation in respect of theirvarious lands which had gotten flooded as a result of the construction of theAkosombo Dam became convinced that the plaintiff had been paid and receivedthe said money which he had embezzled.
In view of this trend of event, the plaintiff become the subject of discussion in bothprint and electronic media of having embezzled the said money and eventhreatened with destoolment by the Akwamu Traditional Council.
As a result ofthis situation, the plaintiff says that he caused the writ to be issued against thedefendant for the reliefs endorsed thereon.
The defendant upon being served delivered their statement of defence in whichthey rejected the basis of the plaintiff claim.
The said statement of defence wassubsequently amended by the defendant.
In the said amended defence, the defendant admitted issuing two copies of theAuditors General report on Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAS) of theCentral Government as well as the Consolidated Fund for the financial year ending31st December, 2010 to the speaker of Parliament.
And subsequently on t