A Traditional leader has filed a GHC2 million defamation suit against Kumasi-based Oyerepa Radio and Television station and others. The Plaintiff, Nana Antwi Fosuhene, a businessman and resident of Manhyia- Ahenebuboano, Kumasi, directed the suit at Eunice Naa Amerley Nortey aka Auntie Naa, Emelia Agyemang, Proprietress and Owner Oyerepa FM and TV and Queenly Lilian Amponsah, a resident of Atonsu. In the writ of summons, the Fosuhene who is the Kyidomhene of Asem, Kumasi, is seeking ‘Compensatory, aggravated, and exemplary damages of GHC 2- million against the defendants. He is also seeking general and punitive damages against the defendants for defaming him and causing him emotional pain, embarrassment, and public ridicule. Fosuhene is further seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their assigns and all persons acting for any of them, or taking instructions from them, from making any oral or written derogatory statement about him. He is soliciting the court to direct the defendants to completely retract the said statements made against him at the same places and on media platforms including social media platforms, as well as publish and broadcast an unqualified public apology on all media platforms. Fosuhene is also seeking further orders or reliefs which the court may consider necessary or just, including cost and solicitors’ fees. In a statement of claim filed at the commercial division of the Kumasi High Courts, Fosuhene said Eunice Naa Amerley Nortey aka Auntie Naa is the host of a programme dubbed ‘Oyerepa Afutuo’ that is aired on Oyerepa FM and TV. It said the second defendant, Emelia Agyeman owns the media platforms (Oyerepa Radia and TV). ‘The third defendant is a former staff of the Plaintiff at Sefo’s and Sons Driving School’, Plaintiff averred. Fosuhene’s case is that on November 29, 2022, Auntie Naa while hosting her programme allowed Emelia Agyemang, the third defendant to make defamatory and false statements ‘without any notice’ to him. Emelia, in an interview with Auntie Naa, alleged that she went looking for a job and met the plaintiff. Emelia alleged that the plaintiff forced her to have sex with him, which resulted in her having five miscarriages after the beating she received from him. Emelia further alleged during the interview that the Fosuhene had gone in for two other ladies because she had difficulty conceiving. Fosuhene said Auntie Naa led and instigated Emelia to portray him in substance as ‘a rapist, unethical businessman who engages in unwelcome sexual affairs with his staff, an abuser, a womanizer and a criminal.’ He contended that Auntie Naa and Emelia in the pursuit of their agenda ‘paraded him as an abusive person.’ Fosuhene said during an interview on the same programme, Auntie Naa and Emelia further paraded him as ‘a rapist and an unethical businessman who forcefully subjects his employees to sexual intercourse and as someone who instigates abortion and assaults a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage.’ He stated that statements made by the two defendants on the said programme ‘were false and were made maliciously by them just to tarnish his hard-won reputation as a businessman and respected Traditional ruler.’ ‘The second defendant on her part also provided them with her platforms for them to defame the plaintiff,’ the Statement of Claim said. According to Fosuhene, ‘These defamatory statements have seriously affected him. ‘Indeed, aside from public ridicule, the plaintiff now finds it difficult to even go to public places as he has to explain himself to almost everybody since they keep asking and chastising him about the words spoken of him by the first and third defendants on the programme.’ Fosuhene said that because of the defamatory statement, his business partners had also formed a negative impression of him and are not willing to do business with him. He claimed that the statement had also cost him his economic interest, reputation, his position as a chief and his self-esteem. ‘The plaintiff avers that all efforts to have the defendants retract their defamatory words have proved futile as the defendants have consistently maintained and stood by their unlawful acts with the sworn intention of soiling the image of the plaintiff and bringing same into disrepute,’ the statement of claim said.
Source: Ghana News Agency