DR. EKWOW SPIO-GARBRAH vs. BERNARD ANTWI BOSIAKO AND WONTUMI MULTIMEDIA CO. LTD.

The appellant sued the respondents in defamation after the 1st respondent, during a discussion on the 2nd respondent’s television station on 10 September 2020, commented in Twi on a statement attributed to Hon. Inusah Fuseini concerning persons who had contested former President Mahama in the NDC presidential primary. The appellant alleged that the words meant he was a crooked businessman who duped people and took their money for personal benefit, and that the publication damaged his reputation locally and internationally. The respondents admitted the statement but pleaded that it was merely the 1st respondent’s understanding or interpretation of an already circulating political statement, made as fair comment on a matter of public interest and without malice. Portion of judgment: “During a discussion on the 2nd Respondent’s TV Station on 10th September, 2020... The 1st Respondent... stated what is contained in paragraph ‘c’ of the particulars of defamation...” and “The Respondents... contended that it was the 1st Respondent’s understanding of the statement attributed to Honourable Inusah Fuseini, and was thus fair comment, made in the public interest, and without any malice.”

JUDGMENT SUURBAAREH, JA The Plaintiff/Appellant, hereinafter called the Appellant, has mounted this instant appeal, following his dissatisfaction with the judgment of the High Court, Kumasi, dated 28th July, 2022, which dismissed his claims for general; aggravated; punitive; and, compensatory damages against the Defendants/Respondents, and went on to award cost of GHC150,000.00 against the Appellant, in favour of the Defendants/Respondents, simply called Respondents hereafter. The trial court, which found that the Appellant’s writ of summons was void and a nullity for not having endorsed a substantive claim on it, however went on to consider the evidence led at the trial, and after applying the law, concluded that the conduct of the 1st Respondent was not defamatory, having regard to the circumstances the words attributed to him were made. The Appellant has mounted the instant appeal on six grounds of appeal. These grounds of appeal, appearing in the Notice of Appeal at pages 329.....