A Superior Court in Essex County, New Jersey, has drastically reduced a defamation judgment against former Ghanaian Member of Parliament for Assin Central, Kennedy Agyapong, from a staggering $18 million to just $500.
The ruling, delivered on Monday, May 12, follows a defamation lawsuit filed by acclaimed investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas. The suit, initially brought before the court on May 17, 2022, accused Kennedy Agyapong and Ghanaian media personality Frederick Asamoah—host of the online talk show The Daddy Fred Show—of making defamatory remarks that severely damaged Anas’ reputation.
Background to the Lawsuit
According to court filings, the defamatory comments were made during an episode of The Daddy Fred Show, a widely followed online program within the Ghanaian diaspora in the United States. During the show, Agyapong allegedly labeled Anas as a criminal, a thief, and insinuated that he was involved in the murder of investigative journalist Ahmed Hussein-Suale.
Suale, a close associate of Anas and a key member of his investigative team, was tragically shot dead in 2019. His murder occurred shortly after the public release of Number 12, a groundbreaking exposé that unveiled deep-rooted corruption within Ghanaian football. The assassination sent shockwaves through the global journalism community and drew condemnation from human rights advocates worldwide.
Initial Verdict and Reversal
Just weeks ago, a U.S. jury found Kennedy Agyapong liable for making malicious and false statements against Anas. In response, the jury handed down an $18 million verdict in Anas’ favor, aimed at compensating him for reputational damage and punitive losses.
However, in a legal twist, Agyapong filed a motion for remittitur—a legal procedure that allows a judge to reduce an excessive jury award. In his motion, Agyapong argued that while the jury’s verdict was acknowledged, the $18 million penalty was disproportionate to the alleged damage caused.
The trial judge concurred with Agyapong’s argument. In a formal decision, the judge ruled that although the former MP had indeed defamed Anas, the financial penalty was “grossly excessive” and reduced it to $500. The court’s revised ruling marks a dramatic turn in a case that has garnered international attention.
Anas Reacts to the Decision
Reacting to the court’s decision, Anas issued a public statement expressing disappointment at the reduced damages but affirmed that his lawsuit was never about financial compensation.
“Consequent to the finding by the jury, an amount of $18 million was awarded in my favour against Kennedy Agyapong,” Anas explained. “Following the award, Kennedy Agyapong filed a motion for remittitur, asking the judge to reduce the amount awarded against him. Thus, inherent in his motion, Kennedy Agyapong admitted to having maliciously defamed me.”
He continued: “Today, the trial judge granted Kennedy Agyapong’s motion for remittitur and reduced the initial award to $500. This means that, while the judge held that Kennedy Agyapong had defamed me, in his reasoning, the award against Kennedy Agyapong by the jury was excessive.”
Anas emphasized that his pursuit of the case was rooted in principle rather than personal gain. “This fight has not been about the money, but rather, a fight for truth and justice. I am happy that not a single allegation was proven against me in court when Kennedy Agyapong was given full opportunity to substantiate,” he said.
Commitment to Justice
Despite the minimal financial outcome, Anas remains steadfast in his mission to expose corruption and uphold journalistic integrity.
“I will continue in my relentless fight against corruption – and in doing that, continue to name, shame, and jail,” Anas declared.
The Ghanaian journalist, known globally for his undercover investigative style, has faced both praise and criticism for his unorthodox methods. While many hail him as a hero for exposing high-level graft, others, including Agyapong, have accused him of unethical journalism—a claim repeatedly denied by Anas and his legal team.
Legal and Public Implications
Though the court reduced the damages, legal experts note that the ruling still constitutes a significant moral victory for Anas. By admitting to malicious defamation in his legal filing, Agyapong essentially acknowledged the baselessness of his claims, a point that Anas believes vindicates his integrity.
The decision also sets a precedent regarding public figures and the limits of free speech when it comes to defaming others in the media. Media watchdogs and free speech advocates will likely analyze the implications of this ruling on future defamation cases involving public personalities and journalists.
As of now, neither Kennedy Agyapong nor his legal team has publicly commented on the court’s final ruling.
