A libel lawsuit demanding US$700,000 in damages against Ecobank-Liberia is reaching its culmination in a Monrovia courtroom. The case revolves around leaked financial information belonging to the Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services (LISGIS), sparking accusations of illicit withdrawals and reputational damage. The plaintiff, Wilmot Smith, former deputy director general for information coordination at LISGIS, alleges that the leaked information, which pertained to the institution’s account with Ecobank, was manipulated and disseminated to tarnish his reputation. Central to the lawsuit are the actions of two individuals: Alex Williams, former deputy director general for Statistics and Data Processing at LISGIS, and Yussif Kromah, a former Ecobank employee.
Smith contends that Williams, a non-signatory to the LISGIS account, obtained confidential account details through Kromah, who was then employed as a Reconciliation Officer at Ecobank. Allegedly, Williams then leveraged this information to falsely accuse Smith of misappropriating US$1.7 million intended for enumerators involved in the 2023 National Housing and Population Census. This accusation, Smith claims, was amplified by Spoon TV, a prominent Liberian talk show, further damaging his reputation.
Ecobank, the sole defendant in the case, maintains that it is not liable for Kromah’s actions. The bank asserts that it conducted an internal investigation, which concluded that Kromah was responsible for the leak. Subsequently, Kromah was dismissed from his position. Ecobank argues that this dismissal absolves them of responsibility for Kromah’s conduct. They emphasize that Kromah acted independently and outside the scope of his employment.
The crux of the legal battle rests on the principle of “respondeat superior,” a legal doctrine that holds employers vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of their employees committed within the scope of their employment. Smith’s legal team argues that Kromah’s actions, even if unauthorized, fall within the scope of his employment responsibilities, as he had access to sensitive financial information as part of his duties. They contend that Ecobank, as Kromah’s employer, bears responsibility for his breach of confidentiality.
The jury’s decision hinges on their interpretation of Kromah’s actions and whether they fall within the scope of his employment. If the jury finds that Kromah acted outside the scope of his employment, Ecobank may be exonerated. However, if the jury determines that Kromah’s actions, though unauthorized, were facilitated by his position and access to confidential information within the bank, then Ecobank could be held liable for the damages sought by Smith. The case underscores the complex legal implications of data breaches and the responsibility of institutions to protect sensitive client information.
The impending verdict is expected to clarify the extent to which financial institutions are held accountable for the actions of their employees, particularly in cases involving the unauthorized disclosure of confidential client information. The outcome will have significant implications for both Ecobank and the Liberian banking sector, potentially influencing future policies and procedures related to data security and employee conduct. It also highlights the increasing importance of cybersecurity and the need for robust internal controls to prevent data breaches and protect the reputations of individuals and institutions.
