Source: ANDREAS KAMASAH
In the latest development surrounding the GH¢10 million defamation suit against political activist Oliver Mawuse Barker-Vormawor, his legal team, led by Dr Justice Srem Sai, has filed a robust Statement of Defence and Counterclaims against the National Security Minister, Albert Kan Dapaah.
Barker-Vormawor and Kan Dapaah
The defamation suit stems from alleged bribery comments made by Barker-Vormawor against Minister Dapaah in September 2023. The activist, alongside his legal representative, filed an 8-page document on Friday, December 12, detailing their defence and presenting counterclaims against the plaintiff.
Among the key assertions made by Barker-Vormawor in his Statement of Defence are accusations of conspiracy by Minister Dapaah to harm him. The defendant seeks a counterclaim that includes:
a. declaration that Plaintiff did, in his capacity as the minister of national security, offer to Defendant monies, plane tickets, appointment to a public office and other facilities in his bid to procure Plaintiff to abandon his activism with the FixTheCountry movement,
b. A declaration that Defendant did reject Plaintiff’s offers of money, aeroplane tickets, appointment to a public office and other facilities and, rather, insisted on continuing with his activism with the FixTheCountry movement,
c. A declaration that Plaintiff did cause, conspire to cause or was complicit in causing the arrest, detention, torture, threats of harm and death, abuse, harassment, of Defendant and, also, complicit in the false prosecution which Defendant has been going through since February 2021,
e. Cost (including attorney fee), and
f. Any other orders that the Court may deem fit.
a) This legal battle is expected to unfold in the coming weeks as both parties present their arguments and evidence before the court. The case has already garnered significant attention due to its implications on the political landscape and the ongoing discourse surrounding activism in Ghana. The court will play a crucial role in determining the merit of the defamation suit and the validity of Barker-Vormawor’s counterclaims.