The Court of Appeal in unanimity has upheld the appeal of Mr. Sammy Gyamfi and has set aside the decision of the High Court which granted damages of GH¢500,000 against Mr. Sammy Gyamfi for defamatory statements made against the reputation of Mr. Matthew Opoku Prempeh, popularly referred to as NAPO.

In the 59 page decision of the Court of Appeal reported as DR. MATTHEW OPOKU PREMPEH v. SAMUEL GYAMFI [TLP-CA-2026-39], the Court held the opinion that all the particulars of defamation as developed at common law were not proved by Mr. Opoku Prempeh for the determination of defamation against him.

In the voice of Her Ladyship Justice Franklina Gesila Adanu, JA, the Court formed the view that the statement of Mr. Sammy Gyamfi, the Appellant in the matter, during a political party press conference on 13/06/2019, that "Seidu’s association with the NPP is more than meets the eye. He is alleged to be the personal bodyguard of the Asokore Mampong MCE, Alhaji Alidu Seidu, and an errand boy for both Manhyia South MP, Hon. Matthew Opoku Prempeh, and Ashanti regional Chairman of the NPP, Bernard Antwi Bosiako (a.k.a. Wontumi)" were not defamatory.

STAR OF THE MONTH - Justin Amenuvor Esq.

In offering the basis for the endorsement of the Appeal filed for and on behalf of Mr. Gyamfi, the Court in unison with H/L Jerome Noble-Nkrumah, JA, offering a voiced concurrence formed the view that "The Respondent failed to show evidence from colleagues, friends, or community members confirming that their opinion of him was lowered or that they began to dissociate themselves from him. Mere call logs to show that people were even truly concerned about the negative impact of the impugned publication, as the Respondent’s attorney asserted, were missing. The creation of the very negative or damnatory context around Seidu Mba and associating him with the Respondent, as submitted by the Respondent’s counsel, did not harm the Respondent in any way."

NAPO's reputation rather surged

Per the concurrence of H/L Jerome Noble-Nkrumah, JA, Mr. Matthew Opoku Prempeh's reputation improved and did not dip from the said harm to his reputation by the words uttered by the Appellant. At page 57 of the judgment, the Court held that, "From the testimony of the plaintiff’s attorney, it is evident that subsequent to the publication in question the plaintiff reputation did not suffer any dip. Indeed from his answers in cross-examination, the plaintiff’s status as a public figure did not suffer any damage but rather surged. He maintained his parliamentary seat, retained his position as minister and did not lose his membership in any of the prestigious societies he was member of, not forgetting about the public awards he received subsequent to the publication. If the thinking of the right persons in society is anything to go by, then the publication, in the light of the admissions of the plaintiff’s attorney, did not hold sway in people’s perception of the plaintiff."