‘We Will Not Be Deterred’ – Afenyo-Markin’s Lawyers Vow to Pursue Defamation Case After Court Throws Out Suit
An Accra High Court has set aside the GH¢15 million defamation writ filed by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin against the CEO of Ghana Gold Board, Sammy Gyamfi.
The ruling was delivered on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, by the High Court, General Jurisdiction 1, presided over by His Lordship Justice Akwasi Adjenim Boateng.
In suit number GJ/1029/2026, the court held that the writ was defective for non-particularisation of the alleged defamatory words, as required under Order 57 Rule 2 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47). The court made no order as to costs.
Afenyo-Markin had sued Sammy Gyamfi and the Multimedia Group on August 24, 2026, over what he described as an “extortionist” tag.
Lawyers to Appeal / Refile
In a press statement issued hours after the ruling, lawyers for Afenyo-Markin at Dehyena Chambers, led by F. Paa Kwesi Abaidoo, Esq., said they have full instructions to pursue the matter to its logical conclusion.
According to the statement, as of 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, the Court Registry had not made a copy of the ruling available to them.
“We therefore await with bated breath for the ruling of the Court to determine the next cause of action as instructed,” the statement said.
The firm criticized Sammy Gyamfi’s approach, stating:
“We find it curiously troubling that Mr. Sammy Gyamfi, who made categorical allegations against Osahen Alexander Kwamena Afenyo-Markin, and publicly claimed to have evidence to substantiate them, and further challenged Osahen to sue, has chosen the path of procedural road blocks rather than file a defence.”
Dehyena Chambers argued that under Order 81 of C.I. 47 and Supreme Court authorities, procedural irregularities are curable since equity looks at substance and not form.
“The time-tested principles of equity have always been that; ‘Justice should not be sacrificed on the altar of technicalities,’” the statement added.
“We will not be deterred by procedural setbacks. The Mills of Justice grind slowly, but with great surety,” it concluded.
Background
The court in its ruling considered whether particulars in the statement of claim could cure the defect in the writ, referencing the Supreme Court decision in Owusu-Domena v Amoah.
The court however distinguished the present case, noting that Sammy Gyamfi had entered a conditional appearance and immediately challenged the writ, unlike in the Owusu-Domena case where the defendant participated fully without objection.
