The Private Newspapers and Online News Publishers Association of Ghana (PRINPAG) has issued a strong condemnation of a recent ruling by the Human Rights Court 2 in Accra, describing it as a troubling development that endangers press freedom and the practice of investigative journalism in the country.
In a statement signed by its President, David Sitsope Tamakloe, the association expressed “profound concern and disappointment” over the decision by Justice Nana Brew to grant an interlocutory injunction. The order restrains investigative journalist Innocent Samuel Appiah from publishing findings of an ongoing investigation into alleged corruption involving Cynthia Adjei and the Lysaro Group.
PRINPAG argues that the injunction—imposed before any investigative report was published—constitutes prior restraint and establishes a dangerous precedent that could undermine the media’s constitutional role as Ghana’s Fourth Estate. “The decision raises serious questions about judicial support for press freedom and accountability,” the association stated, warning that such rulings risk shielding alleged wrongdoing from legitimate public scrutiny.
The association further criticised suggestions in the ruling that journalists should limit their work to collaborating with state investigative bodies such as the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO). It stressed that the media’s role is constitutionally independent, noting: “The media is not an extension of state institutions. Its responsibility is to pursue the truth in the public interest.”
PRINPAG also raised concerns about the court’s acceptance of arguments that private entities linked to public influence or state-related transactions are immune from journalistic scrutiny solely due to their private business status. “Ghana’s democracy cannot thrive where individuals who benefit from proximity to public office are beyond public accountability,” the association warned.
While reaffirming its respect for the judiciary and due process, PRINPAG cautioned that the ruling could embolden public office holders and their affiliates to use legal mechanisms to frustrate media oversight—a trend it described as incompatible with Ghana’s commitment to transparency and the fight against corruption.
The association has urged Mr. Appiah to appeal the ruling and pledged to provide legal and institutional support. It emphasized that its stance extends beyond defending a single journalist to protecting the public’s right to know.
PRINPAG highlighted that investigative journalism is a public service, not an adversarial act, and announced that it is consulting stakeholders on mechanisms to independently verify and further investigate matters of significant public interest arising from the case. The association also called on the Judicial Service of Ghana to reflect on the broader implications of rulings that may appear to hinder press freedom and weaken national anti-corruption efforts.
“The courts must be seen as partners in accountability, not as havens for those seeking to avoid public examination,” the statement concluded.
