In a recent development, political activist Oliver Barker-Vormawor has taken legal action by filing an application at the High Court, requesting the National Security Minister to admit to a series of questions. This application, titled "Request to admit facts," is in relation to a GHc10 million defamation suit brought against Barker-Vormawor by National Security Minister, Albert Kan Dapaah.
The defamation suit stems from comments made by Barker-Vormawor which the Minister alleges have defamed him. Specifically, Kan Dapaah has accused the former FixTheCountry Movement Convener of making defamatory statements and has subsequently initiated legal proceedings against him.
This legal action comes in the wake of allegations made by Barker-Vormawor that the National Security and certain government officials had offered him money to cease his activism against the government. These allegations were refuted by the National Security Minister, prompting the defamation suit.
In response to the legal action, Barker-Vormawor and his legal team, led by Dr. Justice Srem Sai, have filed a Defense and counterclaims with the court. As the case progresses, the Defendant's legal team has submitted a motion titled "Request to admit facts," seeking the Plaintiff (Kan Dapaah) to admit to 17 specific facts within a specified timeframe.
The upcoming court session on February 20, 2024, is expected to provide further directions in this legal matter. EIB Network’s Legal Affairs Correspondent, Murtala Inusah, reports that both parties are gearing up for the next phase of proceedings.
The questions presented in the "Request to admit facts" motion require the Plaintiff to admit to a range of matters related to the National Security Council's discussions and decisions regarding Barker-Vormawor and the activities of the FixTheCountry movement. These questions aim to shed light on the involvement and considerations of the National Security Council and the Plaintiff in relation to the Defendant and his activism.
As this legal dispute unfolds, it is evident that both parties are actively engaging in the legal process to address the allegations and claims at hand. The outcome of this case will undoubtedly have implications for both the individuals involved and the broader issues surrounding freedom of expression and activism.
The court's upcoming directions and subsequent proceedings will provide further clarity on the trajectory of this case. It remains to be seen how the Plaintiff will respond to the request to admit facts and how this will impact the overall legal dispute. As this matter progresses, it will continue to draw attention and scrutiny, given its implications for freedom of expression and government-citizen engagement.
-source starrfm | curated by Aisha Yakubu | Ghana Crimes
