Ace Anan Ankomah v Kevin Taylor and Another PDF

Preview

Summary

A case of Ace Anan Ankomah V Kevin Taylor and Another....

Description

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION, COURT 6) ACCRA HELD ON MONDAY THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO ____________________________________________________________ SUIT NO: GJ/1692/2019 ACE ANAN ANKOMAH

PLAINTIFF

VERSUS KEVIN EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR LOUD SILENCE MEDIA

DEFENDANTS

PARTIES: Plaintiff – Present Defendants – Absent COUNSEL: Mr. Thaddeus SORY with Marie-Nicole POKU for the Plaintiff - PRESENT DEFENDANTS- NOT REPRESENTED __________________________________________________________________

JUDGMENT i.

Introduction:

[1]

The Internet has sparked a communication revolution in postmodern society. It offers

society great opportunities for awareness creation and self-expression, all necessary especially in democratic societies which are reliant on informed citizen participation. It has become a useful research tool for many people including those in academia, journalism and law. The Internet is a communication medium which seemingly has no geographical boundaries1. It is said to have 1

The borderless nature of the internet makes it possible for a native of Insu-Siding in the Western Region of Ghana to communicate with a family member resident in the Canadian province of Ontario. By the pg. 1

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

democratized communication technological abridgment of time and space, placing power in the hands of ordinary citizens to disseminate information across space and preserve same in time.2 Undoubtedly, this accessible medium of communication has expanded the boundaries of free speech and self-expression through the availability of applications such as WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, You Tube, Instagram, Flickr etcetera. Unfortunately, accessibility has not translated into responsibility and as with other media which preceded the Internet including print, radio and television, the Internet has also become a medium for people to disseminate unsubstantiated information under the guise of commenting about fellow citizens or public figures.

[2]

To put it differently, for those who wish to engage in cyber-libel and/or defame others, the

Internet medium provides an easily accessible platform to do so. So prevalent has this become that some scholars define contemporary times as being post-truth or post-fact with the term “fake news” becoming a buzzword 3, one in which “truth” is not verifiable fact but rather the repetition of narrative that appeals to emotion instead of reasoning, often facilitated by a media ecosystem dominated by the Internet and social media. This unfortunate aspect of the use of the Internet is what has led to this defamatory law suit. Defamation is therefore the centerpiece of these judicial proceedings.

[3]

The impugned comments which led to this suit originated with a video posted by Mr.

Taylor on his and the 2nd Defendant’s Facebook pages on or about July 24, 2019 “With All Due Respect – Loud Silence Media” titled “NAM 1and Matters Arising (Part 2)”. According to the Plaintiff on July 23, 2019 the Defendants released a promotional video titled “NAM 1 and Matters

same medium Nii Lantei is able to instantaneously and cheaply communicate from Eastern Canada with Naa Ogboshie at Teshie in Accra, Ghana. 2 See, for Example, Odartey-Wellington, Felix (2014). “Technological invasion of privacy: The need for appropriate responses to the new surveillance society in Ghana.” CDD-Ghana Briefing Paper, 13 (4), 110. 3 For a discussion, see for example: Cooke, Nicole A. (2018). Fake News and Alternative Facts: Information Literacy in a Post-Truth Era. Chicago: American Library Association; Rochlin, Nick (2017). “Fake news: belief in post-truth.” Library Hi Tech, 35. 3: 386-392; Hannan, Jason (2018). “Trolling ourselves to death? Social media and post-truth politics.” European Journal of Communication 33.2: 214-226; Pate, Umaru A., Danjuma Gambo, and Adamkolo Mohammed Ibrahim (2019). “The impact of fake news and the emerging post-truth political era on Nigerian polity: A review of literature.” Studies in Media and Communication 7.1: 21-29; Coker, Wincharles, and Francis Afriyie (2019). “Post-truth, the print media and political messages in Ghana.” Covenant Journal of Communication 5.2: 24-43. pg. 2

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

Arising (Part 2)” with his photograph and stated that “And as you can see, the honourable Ace Anan Ankomah. Everybody knows Ace Anan Ankomah…”

[4]

The statement of claim lists many examples of the defamatory comments made by Mr.

Taylor and same was confirmed by Mr. Ankomah’s testimony through the witness statement filed. The defamatory comments which has been accepted by the Court include the facts that the Plaintiff was falsely accused of being involved in or the person behind the business scandal of one Nana Appiah Mensah popularly known and referred to in the Ghanaian media and populace as “NAM1”. Mr. Taylor stated that the Plaintiff and some persons were “behind the ordeal or were behind the scandal surrounding NAM 1’s business and the incarceration of Nana Appiah Mensah”. Now, what did Mr. Ankomah tell the Court?

ii.

The Background:

[5]

The 1st Defendant, Kevin Ekow Baidoo Taylor published a video which was circulated on

his Facebook wall and also posted on YouTube. In the video the 1st Defendant said a Company called Horizon Royal Diamond Company based in Dubai came to Ghana after the company was defrauded by certain individuals. According to the 1st Defendant, the said Company retained Mr. Ace Ankomah as a lawyer to help them track and arrest the fraudsters. He further stated that the officials of the Company had “pictures, statements and CCTV evidence” and they handed all over to Mr. Ankomah. Mr. Taylor further the Plaintiff, Mr. Ankomah told them he was going to talk to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) and ensure that the legal process is adhered to. The 1st Defendant further stated Mr. Ankomah contacted his “uncle K.K. Amoah who is the former boss of EOCO”. According to Mr. Taylor Mr. Ankomah despite having all the necessary information for the arrest of the said fraudsters, in connection with EOCO and some government officials dragged his feet and failed to act and therefore the officials of the Horizon Company left Ghana.

[6]

According to him, based on the disappointment faced by the Company, they entered into

some agreement with Nana Appiah Mensah NAM1 because they had only one plan, and it was that Ghanaians and EOCO was doing nothing to help them. Mr. Taylor further stated that because the Company Officials were disappointed upon their return to Dubai they inserted Nana Appiah

pg. 3

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

Mensah’s name in their police statement in Dubai as having committed a crime against them. According to Mr. Taylor, Nana Appiah Mensah’s arrest was all Mr. Ankomah’s fault because he colluded with Mr. K.K. Amoah and government officials to let those fraudsters escape from justice; but lied about it and made sure that Nana Appiah Mensah took the blame for a crime he did not commit. He referred to Mr. Ankomah as a liar, a fraudster, criminal and a dimwit.

iii.

The Action:

[7]

The Plaintiff, Mr. Ace Anan Ankomah a Barrister and Solicitor with many

accomplishments vehemently denied the allegations as captured on the video and takes the position that by the utterances made in the video, the Defendants meant and were understood to mean that he, acting in concert with others named in the video, orchestrated all the allegations and perceptions of ignominy, disrepute, dishonor, disgrace and stigma associated with Nana Appiah Mensah, NAM 1 business. He therefore sued.

[8]

The Plaintiff accuses the Defendants of defaming and tarnishing his hard-earned reputation

and therefore issued out the Writ of Summons on 30th July 2019 against the Defendants, Kevin Ekow Baidoo Taylor and the Loud Silence Media for damages in the sum of Ten Million Ghana Cedis (GH¢10,000,000) among other reliefs. Mr. Ankomah obtained default judgment against the Defendants for defamation aggravated damages, exemplary damages, compensatory damages, perpetual injunction and an order for an apology and costs etc. The Default judgment was entered on October 28, 2019 and the Court adjourned to hear from the Plaintiff and for the assessment of damages after an order for the filing of a witness statement and service of same on the Defendants was ordered.

[9]

Counsel for the Plaintiff on November 6, 2019 filed the witness statement ordered by the

Court and served same on the Defendants by substituted service. A notice of compliance with the Court Order was filed on November 26, 2019 by counsel to confirm the service of the witness statement together with a copy of the October 28, 2019 order of the Court. The service of the process of the court on the Defendants notwithstanding, the Defendants neglected to file any process at all to contest the Plaintiff’s suit. It appears from Mr. Taylor's posts that he could not be bothered with the legal action because after he became aware of the Plaintiff’s letter dated July

pg. 4

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

24, 2019 in which he threatened a legal action he stated as per Exhibit “X” that “Ace Anan Ankomah, I am not done with you yet so don’t think it’s over. You still need to answer some questions”. Consequently, though served with the writ of summons and the default judgment order Mr. Taylor and the 2nd Defendant did not appear or participate in the assessment of damages. The Plaintiff provided a copy of a DHL tracking slip showing delivery to Mr. Taylor’s home in Alexandria, Virginia and at the door of Apt 4A, 291 E, 3rd Street, New York. [10]

Pursuant to the provisions of Order 36 Rule 2 (a) of CI 47, I proceeded to hear the evidence

of the Plaintiff once I became satisfied that the Defendants have been notified of the pending suit. On November 27, 2019 the Court adopted the Witness Statement filed by the Plaintiff as his evidence in chief under oath. The Court then adjourned the matter for judgment because it took the position that the Defendants were not interested in cross-examining the Plaintiff and therefore discharged him because the Plaintiff indicated that he did not intend to call any other witness. iv.

The Plaintiff’s Evidence:

[11]

The Plaintiff’s evidence is that, the 1st Defendant is a Ghanaian Citizen who is presently

ordinarily resident in Virginia in the United States of America and “who has recently gained worldwide notoriety and makes a living from regularly releasing videos and other materials on the internet that largely contain insults and falsehoods targeted at some prominent Ghanaians”. According to Mr. Ankomah the 2nd Defendant is accompany owned, controlled and run by the 1st Defendant, through which he produces and publishes his videos and other materials. In the view of the Plaintiff the 2nd Defendant is the alter ego of the 1st Defendant. Mr. Ankomah further testified that the “the Defendants run and control pages and fan walls on Facebook, Twitter and the internet video channel YouTube, through which they propagate their work and conduct their business, targeted to a worldwide audience and with a specific focus on Ghana and Ghanaians”.

[12]

Mr. Ankomah per the witness statement outlined in detail his accomplishments as a lawyer

who is highly respected by many both locally and abroad. He for instance testified that he is the Managing Partner and Head of Disputes Department of the law firm, Bentsi-Enchill, Letsa and Ankomah who has worked with various individuals and organisations within Ghana and outside Ghana. He also said he has been involved in the professional training and development of almost 100 young lawyer in his 27 years legal career. Mr. Ankomah tendered many Exhibits including

pg. 5

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

Exhibit “A” series which are examples of correspondence from the University of Ghana after it instituted an award in his name titled “The Ace Anan Ankomah Prize in Constitutional Law, Faculty of Law, University of Ghana, Legon”.

[13]

The Plaintiff tendered in support of his evidence with regards to his accomplishments and

activities, the following exhibits: i)

Exhibits B and B1 – a correspondence from Lex Mundi, the world’s leading association of independent law firms with a membership of about 160 law firms with over 21, 000 lawyers in over 100 countries when he was appointed a director of the group”;

ii)

Exhibits C and C1 – documents confirming that he served as a Panel member of the Panel of Arbitrators of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) of the World Bank;

iii)

Exhibits D – A correspondence confirming the appointment of the Plaintiff as a member of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) between 2012 and 2015;

iv)

Exhibits D1 – Confirms the Plaintiff as a fellow of the Aspen Global Leadership Network (AGLN), which he describes as “a worldwide community of over 3,000 high integrity and entrepreneurial leaders from business, government and the nonprofit sector in more than 50 countries”. The Plaintiff is also a fellow of the Africa Leadership Initiative, West Africa (ALIWA), the West African affiliate of the AGLN;

v)

Exhibit E – A letter of Invitation from the Dominion University College, when he had the honour of being the Guest Speaker at the University’s Congregation in 2017. Mr. Ankomah further testified that he was the Guest Speaker at the Congregation of the University of Ghana.

vi)

Exhibit F – A copy of an invitation letter from the Ghana Bar Association when the Plaintiff was honoured to be the keynote speaker at the Annual Conference of the Association.

vii)

Exhibit G – A copy of an article from the 27th August 2018 Edition of the New Yorker Magazine when the Plaintiff’s work as a lawyer in international disputes.

pg. 6

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

[14]

The Plaintiff further testified that he is a published author who has published legal and

other scholarly works both in Ghana and outside Ghana in respected journals like the University of Ghana Law Journal, Review of Ghana Law, Financial Law Journal and the Mauritius Book of Conference Papers on Arbitration. The Plaintiff further testified that he has been a regular speaker at local and international conferences and seminars such as Ghana Bar Association, Lex Mundi, London Court of International Arbitration, ECOWAS Court of Justice, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Nigeria Chapter) etc. Mr. Ankomah also testified that he is a recipient of several awards including the 1990 Ghana Bar Association for Outstanding Academic Performance at the University of Ghana. He also said he was awarded the Law Foundation of Ontario Award, Graduate Award and Graduate Studies Dean’s Award at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario where he obtained his Master of Laws (LLM) degree.

The Defamation Allegations: [15]

The Plaintiff tendered as Exhibit “J”, the video (on a pen drive) and transcript of the video

as Exhibit “J1”. From the video and the transcript, some of the statements made which the Plaintiff contends are defamatory include the fact that the Plaintiff was; “in contact with Gabby Otchere-Darko, a prominent member of the ruling party, to make sure that NAM1 was discredited and tagged as a criminal”.

Also, it was stated that the Plaintiff “was on TV,…radio…granted interviews and made sure to paint Nana Appiah Mensah black for Ghanaians to think that this boy was actually practicing a Ponzi scheme…” [16]

From the video, again the Defendants stated that the Plaintiff has committed crime. It was

stated that “Ace Ankomah basically committed crime. He committed treason. He sold his country, yes, he sold his country to another country all because the evinces [sic], the greed, these people… he should come out and defend himself that he never knew from the start. Ace Ankomah should come out”.

It was further stated that the Plaintiff:

pg. 7

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

“perverted in character, engaged in criminal and illegal activities…glued to the Jubilee house, so glued to the politicians that he is basically their surrogate…who goes on TV…radio to paint Nana Appiah Mensah black even though he has hard evidence that Nana Appiah Mensah never committed any crime…”

[17]

The 1st Defendant further stated on the video that: “…for a lawyer to have hard core evidence about fraudsters who have defrauded a foreign company over fifty million dollars and to stick that in your dirty ass, come sit on TV and speak like you know nothing about it, it is disgusting and these people have to be spoken against…these are liars who walk about telling people they have credibility, they have nothing…”

[18]

According to the Plaintiff the Defendants further accused him of unprofessional and

unethical conduct when they stated in the video that: “Now the funny thing is, Ace Anan Ankomah…so Ace Ankomah drags his feet after he had the conversation with his uncle K.K. Amoah and other people in government who are more interested in this issue than even Nana Appiah Mensah. I will tell you about these people. Ace Ankomah drags the issue. He makes it back and forth issue and Horizon loses interest”.

[19]

The Defendants further referred to the Plaintiff as a liar and a criminal. On the video it was

stated that: “These people, these people are liars. These people you see on your TV on your radio, on your whatever, they are liars. They cook up stories and they frame people up…This country has come too far to allow such dimwits, such criminals and thugs to take over this nation”.

[20]

The above and other statements contained in the video are the reasons behind the Plaintiff’s

claim in this suit. The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants ’ allegations that he is the person behind the scandal concerning the business of Nana Appiah Mensah known in Ghana as “NAM 1” are not true. It is the contention of Mr. Ankomah that the statements contained in the video

pg. 8

ACE ANAN ANKOMAH v. EKOW BAIDOO TAYLOR & ANOTHER - JUDGMENT

“were meant to be understood by the general public falsely that in the practice of my profession and public advocacy, I had conducted myself in unprofessional manner in my own-interest and in complete breach of the ethical obligations that I owe to the legal profession and the public”.

[21]

The Plaintiff vehemently denied all the allegations and contends that by the publication

and circulation of the video the Defendants with specific intent have damaged his reputation and lowered his reputation in the estimation and the eyes of the right-thinking persons reading about it in Ghana and all over the world. In addition to the video, materials such as Facebook posts and reader/viewer comments were submitted to the Court which were testified to by Mr. Ankomah. The...