This case revolves around a defamation suit filed by Reverend John Ntim Fordjour, the Member of Parliament for Assin South, against two individuals, Stephen Cobbah (alias Adepa) and Yaw Korankye (alias Ampong), for defamatory statements made on a WhatsApp platform called “Assinman Politics Gh.” The statements, published in March 2024, became the subject of legal action when Rev. Fordjour sought redress through the Cape Coast High Court. His claim included a declaration that the statements were defamatory, substantial damages of GH¢1 million, a perpetual injunction to prevent further defamation, a retraction and apology from the defendants, and legal costs.
The court proceedings culminated in a judgment delivered on April 28, 2025, which decisively favored Rev. Fordjour. The court affirmed that the statements made by Cobbah and Korankye were indeed defamatory, thus validating the core of Rev. Fordjour’s claim. The judgment included a significant financial penalty, awarding damages of GH¢700,000 against the defendants jointly and severally. This means that both defendants are equally responsible for the full amount, and Rev. Fordjour can collect the entire sum from either one or both of them. Additionally, each defendant was ordered to pay GH¢20,000 in court costs, further adding to the financial repercussions of their actions.
Beyond the financial penalties, the court imposed several other measures aimed at rectifying the damage caused by the defamatory statements. A perpetual injunction was issued, prohibiting Cobbah and Korankye from publishing any further defamatory material about Rev. Fordjour. This injunction serves as a long-term protection against future defamation. Furthermore, the court mandated a retraction of the offending statements, requiring the defendants to publicly disavow their previous remarks. This retraction was ordered to be published with the same prominence as the original defamatory statements, ensuring that the correction reaches the same audience that witnessed the initial defamation.
The court also directed the defendants to issue an unqualified written apology to Rev. Fordjour. This apology, like the retraction, must be disseminated on the “Assinman Politics Gh.” WhatsApp platform, as well as any other platforms where the defamatory statements were circulated. This ensures that the apology reaches all those who were exposed to the original defamation, providing a public acknowledgment of the wrongdoing and an attempt to restore Rev. Fordjour’s reputation. The combination of the retraction and apology aims to mitigate the damage caused by the initial statements.
This case highlights the growing legal scrutiny surrounding online platforms and the potential consequences of using these platforms to spread defamatory information. It underscores the responsibility that individuals bear for their online communications, particularly in the context of political discourse. The court’s decision sends a clear message that social media platforms are not immune to legal oversight and that individuals can be held accountable for defamatory statements made online. The substantial damages awarded, combined with the injunction, retraction, and apology requirements, demonstrate the seriousness with which the court views defamation in the digital age.
The outcome of this case serves as a precedent for future cases involving online defamation, particularly on platforms like WhatsApp. It reinforces the principle that freedom of speech is not absolute and that it comes with the responsibility to avoid making false and damaging statements about others. The judgment provides a clear legal framework for addressing online defamation and underscores the need for individuals to exercise caution and responsibility in their online communications. It also highlights the increasing role of the judiciary in regulating online speech and ensuring accountability for defamatory statements made in the digital sphere.
