Television personality, Justice Kwaku Annan has responded to the decision by former Inspector General of Police (IGP) David Asante Appeatu to discontinue the defamation case against him and Member of Parliament for Assin Central Kennedy Agyapong.
According to Annan, the decision to drop the case was as a result of lack of evidence by the complainant.
In his view, every news item he put across regarding the Ex-IGP had evidence supporting it hence, he was ready for the legal battle.
“Do you see your real size,” he told the former IGP on his show Monday December 13.
Asante-Appeatu had discontinued the defamation case he filed.
He had sued the two over comments they made made against him on Net 2 television’s ‘The Seat’ talk show In a writ of summons dated July 2, the former police Chief said the defendant, on June 16, 2021 during the course of his programme, which is broadcast in Twi and English, made a defamatory statement about him.
According to Mr Asante-Apeatu, the words used by Mr Kweku Annan “meant and were understood to mean that;
(i) The plaintiff was and is a fence for notorious criminals both in Ghana and Nigeria.
(ii) The plaintiff harbours criminals.
(iii) The plaintiff is a criminal who has been working in cahoots with hardened international criminals to unleash terror on Ghanaians.
(iv) The plaintiff is/was on the payroll of top criminals in Ghana and as such slept on his duty as IGP and he refused/neglected to cause the arrest and prosecution of the criminals.”
Mr Asante-Apeatu told the court, “he has been inundated with numerous calls from professional associates, journalists, social relations and friends and outright strangers and he has to answer very mortifying questions.”
Meanwhile the trial judge hearing, Justice Ekow Baiden, is reported to have recused himself from the matter.
The trial judge said he had not seen the process to discontinue the matter and, therefore, could not grant the same after Mr Asante-Appeatu’s lawyer, Mr Sammy Darko had moved to discntinue the case.
“I have not seen the process so I can’t act on it. I need to see a process, go through it, and make up my mind on it,” he said.
“There is no way a court of law will condemn a person without giving that person adequate opportunity to be heard,” he said.
Justice Baiden said it appeared that this fundamental principle in court was alien to Mr Darko.
“I reassure counsel for the plaintiff that my directive was not tainted with any form of bias and that the right to be heard is embodied in serving of hearing notice,” he said.