Dr. Tony Aubynn, the former Chief Executive Officer of the Minerals Commission, has initiated a legal battle against Paul Adom-Otchere, host of Good Evening Ghana, for what he claims are defamatory statements made about him. The suit, filed on November 26, 2024, at the High Court in Accra, also names Ignite Media Group, the media organization behind the broadcast, as a co-defendant.
Dr. Aubynn, who currently serves as the Abakoma-Akyempimhene of the Damang-Wassa Division in the Western Region, contends that the remarks have significantly tarnished his reputation.
According to the plaintiff, Adom-Otchere’s comments were not only baseless but also designed to diminish his standing in the eyes of right-thinking members of society. Dr. Aubynn insists that the statements were crafted to portray him as dishonest, corrupt, unpatriotic, and untrustworthy. He maintains that such allegations, which he categorically denies, have exposed him to public ridicule and damaged his reputation irreparably.
As part of his reliefs, Dr. Aubynn is seeking a court order compelling Adom-Otchere and Ignite Media Group to issue a retraction and an unqualified apology. He has requested that the apology be made through the same media platforms used to publish the original statements. Additionally, he is asking the court for an injunction to permanently prevent the defendants from making any further defamatory statements about him.
The suit also demands financial compensation for the damage caused. Dr. Aubynn is claiming general damages of GH₵30 million, alongside punitive and exemplary damages of GH₵10 million. He argues that these amounts are necessary not only to compensate him for the harm done to his reputation but also to serve as a deterrent to others who might be tempted to act in a similar manner.
In his statement of claims, Dr. Aubynn outlines what he describes as a calculated and malicious effort by the defendants to harm his reputation. He alleges that Adom-Otchere deliberately misrepresented facts during the broadcast, attributing false statements to him with the intent of whipping up public sentiment against him. According to the plaintiff, these actions were carried out with complete disregard for the truth.
Dr. Aubynn further accuses the defendants of neglecting their journalistic duty to verify the claims before publishing them. Despite having the means to contact him for clarification, they allegedly failed to do so. This failure, he contends, highlights their reckless disregard for the potential consequences of their actions.
The broadcast in question allegedly portrayed Dr. Aubynn as a person who incites illegal miners to destroy the environment. The plaintiff argues that such a depiction not only lacks any basis in fact but was also made with malicious intent. He insists that the statements were crafted to paint him as a corrupt and unscrupulous individual unworthy of public trust.
Dr. Aubynn asserts that the defendants’ actions went beyond the initial publication of the defamatory remarks. He claims that they deliberately facilitated the widespread circulation of the statements, ensuring they reached a larger audience to maximize their impact. This, he argues, was part of a calculated strategy to inflict maximum harm on his reputation.
The plaintiff highlights the professional backgrounds of the defendants as evidence that their actions were not accidental. He argues that both Adom-Otchere, an experienced journalist, and Ignite Media Group, a prominent media organization, should have known the potential consequences of their statements. Their decision to proceed with the broadcast despite this knowledge, he contends, underscores the malicious intent behind their actions.
Dr. Aubynn has also outlined the emotional and social toll the allegations have taken on him. He explains that as a respected traditional leader and public figure, his reputation is integral to his ability to serve his community and fulfill his responsibilities. The broadcast, he says, has not only undermined his personal and professional standing but has also caused him significant distress.
The plaintiff emphasizes that the allegations made against him were not only false but were also published with reckless disregard for their veracity. He contends that the defendants acted with malice, seeking to tarnish his reputation for reasons best known to them. He further alleges that the statements were part of a broader pattern of irresponsible journalism that prioritizes sensationalism over truth.
In support of his claims for exemplary damages, Dr. Aubynn argues that the defendants’ actions were particularly egregious. He states that their conduct reflects a complete disregard for ethical journalism and a willingness to sacrifice an individual’s reputation for personal or corporate gain. By seeking exemplary damages, the plaintiff hopes to send a strong message about the importance of responsible reporting.
Dr. Aubynn’s legal action raises important questions about the role of the media in society and the balance between free expression and accountability. While the media plays a critical role in shaping public opinion and holding individuals accountable, it also has a duty to ensure that its reporting is accurate and fair. This case, therefore, serves as a reminder of the consequences of failing to uphold these standards.
For Dr. Aubynn, the lawsuit represents an opportunity to clear his name and restore his reputation. He maintains that he has always conducted himself with integrity, both in his professional life and as a traditional leader. By taking legal action, he hopes to not only vindicate himself but also deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
The case is also a test of Ghana’s legal framework for addressing defamation. As the court deliberates on the matter, it will have to weigh the evidence presented by both sides and determine whether the defendants’ actions constituted defamation. The outcome will likely have significant implications for media practice in Ghana and beyond.
Dr. Aubynn’s pursuit of justice highlights the high stakes involved in cases of defamation. For individuals in positions of public trust, a damaged reputation can have far-reaching consequences. By seeking redress through the courts, the plaintiff underscores the importance of holding media practitioners accountable for their actions.
As the case unfolds, it will serve as a reminder to both media professionals and the public of the need to balance the right to free expression with the responsibility to protect individuals from unwarranted harm. For now, Dr. Aubynn remains steadfast in his commitment to clearing his name and safeguarding his reputation.
