Pressure group Democracy Hub and 12 of its members have filed a defamation action against the founder of The New Force, Nana Kwame Bediako, over what they described as a series of false and malicious statements made against them.
Nana Kwame Bediako, also known as Cheddar, per the suit filed by Democracy Hub and 12 of its members, including Oliver Barker-Vormawor, is to provide the basis for statements he had published on 25 and 26 September 2024.
According to the plaintiffs, these publications sought to portray their movement and organisers as fronts for partisan political actors and as participants in sponsored activities.
They said these allegations are entirely false, without basis, and inconsistent with their long-standing record of independent civic mobilisation.
It is the case of Democracy Hub that, since its establishment, it has stood for constitutionalism, accountable governance, citizen empowerment, and the right of Ghanaians to peacefully assemble.
“Our protests, including #FixTheCountry, #OccupyJulorbiHouse, and #StopGalamsey, have been organised transparently, publicly, and without sponsorship or direction from any political party,” the plaintiffs argued.
It said attempts to distort this history not only harm the reputations of individual organisers but also undermine the integrity of civic action in Ghana.
Reliefs
Per their statement of claims, they are seeking a declaration that the statements published and caused to be published by the defendant on or about 25-26 September 2024 are false, malicious, and defamatory of the plaintiffs.
Also, a declaration that the defendant’s publications, whether by video, written text, or oral repetition to third parties, have unlawfully injured the reputation, integrity, and public standing of each of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs are seeking an order directing the defendant to publish a full, clear, and unequivocal retraction and apology, in terms to be approved by the plaintiffs or the court:
These they said ought to be done on the defendant’s X account; in the same form, prominence, and duration as the impugned videos; and in any additional media outlets as the court may deem fit.
The plaintiffs are seeking general damages for defamation, for each plaintiff, for the injury to reputation, distress, humiliation, loss of public confidence, and the continuing harm caused by the defendant’s publications.
Again, they are asking for aggravated and exemplary damages, in view of the defendant’s malice; his deliberate projection of insider knowledge to lend false credibility to his allegations; the repeated publication of multiple videos; the wide dissemination amplified by his presidential campaign; and his refusal to retract or correct the statements.
The plaintiffs said this includes his private repetition and insistence upon the truth of the defamatory allegations.
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, whether by himself, his servants, agents, assigns, or any persons acting on his behalf, from further publishing, causing to be published, or repeating the same or similar defamatory statements concerning the plaintiffs.
Costs, including legal fees and any further or other relief that this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances.
Source: www.kumasimail.com
