Court of Appeal dismisses Ken Agyapong’s 2nd try to halt Multimedia CEO’s defamation trial – Life Pulse Daily
Editor-in-chiefFebruary 24, 20263 Mins read10
Court of Appeal Dismisses Ken Agyapong’s Second Attempt to Halt Multimedia CEO’s Defamation Trial
Introduction
In a significant legal development, the Court of Appeal has rejected Kennedy Agyapong’s latest effort to suspend the ongoing defamation case against him. This ruling marks another setback for the former MP as the trial against him for alleged defamatory statements continues to move forward.
Key Points
- The Court of Appeal dismissed Kennedy Agyapong's application to stay proceedings in the defamation case
- The ruling was delivered by a three-judge panel including Justices Angelina Mensah Homiah, Emmanuel S. Amedane, and Douglas Seidu
- The court imposed a GH¢10,000 cost against Agyapong for filing the application
- This represents Agyapong's second failed attempt to halt the trial proceedings
- The defamation case stems from allegations made against Multimedia Group in 2021
- The trial is set to resume on February 11, 2026
Background
The defamation lawsuit was initiated by Kwesi Twum, CEO of Multimedia Group, along with the organization and Joy FM, following statements made by Kennedy Agyapong in July 2021. During that period, Agyapong repeated allegations that the Multimedia Group had demanded money from the government and held a vendetta against it.
The plaintiffs contend that these statements were false, defamatory, and constituted reckless attacks on their reputation and journalists. The case has been ongoing since 2023, with multiple legal maneuvers from both sides attempting to advance or delay the proceedings.
Analysis
The Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeal’s decision to dismiss the stay application was based on the principle that proceeding with the trial would not render any future judgment worthless, even if Agyapong’s interlocutory appeal were to succeed later. This reasoning demonstrates the court’s commitment to ensuring that justice is not unduly delayed by procedural tactics.
Legal Strategy and Costs
The plaintiffs’ legal team, led by Samson Lardy Anyenini, had requested substantial costs against Agyapong, characterizing his application as part of deliberate delay tactics that should be punished. While the court did award costs, it imposed GH¢10,000 rather than a higher amount, suggesting a balanced approach between discouraging frivolous applications and maintaining proportionality.
Historical Context
Significantly, the court has allowed evidence of similar defamatory comments made by Agyapong in 2011, for which he had previously retracted and apologized. The plaintiffs argue that his repetition of these allegations in 2021 necessitated their legal action, making the earlier conduct relevant to establishing a pattern of behavior.
Practical Advice
For individuals involved in similar legal disputes, this case offers several important lessons:
1. **Consider the implications of repeated allegations**: Making similar claims after previously retracting them can strengthen the opposing party’s case.
2. **Be mindful of delay tactics**: Courts increasingly view repeated attempts to stay proceedings unfavorably, often imposing costs.
3. **Prepare for evidence from past conduct**: Previous statements or actions, even if retracted, may become relevant if similar allegations are repeated.
4. **Understand interlocutory appeals**: The timing and strategy of appeals during ongoing proceedings require careful consideration to avoid being perceived as obstructive.
FAQ
What is the current status of the defamation case?
The defamation case is proceeding as the Court of Appeal has dismissed Kennedy Agyapong’s application to stay the proceedings. The trial is scheduled to resume on February 11, 2026.
Why did the Court of Appeal reject Agyapong’s application?
The court determined that proceeding with the trial would not render any future judgment worthless, even if Agyapong’s interlocutory appeal were to succeed later. This reasoning suggests the court prioritized the efficient administration of justice over procedural delays.
What are the potential consequences if Agyapong is found liable for defamation?
While specific damages haven’t been publicly discussed, defamation cases in Ghana can result in significant financial penalties, mandatory retractions or apologies, and potential impacts on reputation. The exact consequences would depend on the court’s findings regarding the extent and impact of the alleged defamatory statements.
Can Agyapong make another attempt to halt the trial?
While technically possible, the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of his second attempt significantly weakens his position. Further applications would likely face even greater scrutiny and skepticism from the courts.
Conclusion
The Court of Appeal’s dismissal of Kennedy Agyapong’s second attempt to halt the Multimedia CEO’s defamation trial represents a decisive moment in this high-profile case. By allowing the proceedings to continue, the court has signaled its unwillingness to entertain what it may view as tactical delays in the judicial process.
As the trial resumes, both parties will need to prepare for the substantive hearing of the defamation claims. For Agyapong, this means defending against allegations of making false and defamatory statements about Multimedia Group. For the plaintiffs, it represents an opportunity to seek redress for what they characterize as reckless attacks on their reputation.
The case continues to highlight important issues regarding media freedom, political speech, and the boundaries of acceptable public discourse in Ghana’s democratic landscape. As it moves toward resolution, it will undoubtedly remain a focal point for discussions about press freedom, political accountability, and the legal limits of public commentary.
Sources
This article is based on reporting from Life Pulse Daily, published on February 24, 2026. The information presented reflects the court proceedings and legal positions as described in the original reporting.
Leave a comment