Anas $18m victory over Kennedy Agyapong Reduced to $500 by US Court

A US judge has reduced the $18 million awarded to investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas by a jury to a mere $500.

This follows a motion for remitter filed by lawyers for the former Member of Parliament (MP) for Assin Central, challenging the ‘excessive’ sum awarded by the jury in March this year.

A remitter is a ruling by a judge (usually following a motion to reduce or throw out a jury verdict) lowering the amount of damages granted by a jury in a civil case.

A jury had awarded $18 million against Mr. Agyapong and Frederick Asamoah, a social media commentator, following a defamation suit filed by Anas in the Essex County Superior Court in New Jersey.

This defamation suit stems from statements Mr. Agyapong made following the airing of the BBC documentary on corruption, “Betraying the Game,” on October 28, 2018.

Mr. Agyapong was found liable for defamation and slapped with damages of $18 million.

It would be recalled that moments after the jury awarded the $18 million against Mr. Agyapong, private legal practitioner, Kwasi Kwarteng clarified that lawyers for the former MP had raised an issue of mistrial due to misunderstanding of the facts by the jury.

This, according to him, placed an automatic injunction on the jury’s decision and award until the final determination of the issue of mistrial raised by the defence team.

Mr. Kwarteng clarified that when the jury reconvened to address punitive damages, it became clear that they had already factored punitive damages into their initial determination – despite explicit instructions from the court to deliberate on it separately.

In response, he said Mr. Agyapong’s legal team immediately raised concerns, arguing that this confusion rendered the verdict legally unsound and constituted grounds for a mistrial.

“Recognising the significance of these concerns, the judge dismissed the jury and granted both parties 30 days to file their respective processes regarding the mistrial,” Mr. Kwarteng further pointed out.

 

Anas Responds

Meanwhile, a statement issued by Anas’ Tiger Eye P.I indicated that it takes solace in the fact that the court agreed with him that Mr. Agyapong defamed him.

The statement emphasised that the case was never about financial compensation, but about the pursuit of truth and justice.

“Many avenues of redemption accrue to me. But it is important to state, as I previously did, that this fight has not been about the money, but rather a fight for truth and justice,” the statement said.

“I am happy that not a single allegation was proven against me in court when Kennedy Agyapong was given full opportunity to substantiate,” it added.

Ken

In a statement, Kennedy Agyapong’s media team claimed “there was never an $18 million judgment against Hon. Ken Ohene Agyapong to begin with!”

They rather insisted that the $500 award was the result of a strategic motion filed by Ken’s legal team to hold the initial jury decision.

“This means that the $500 figure was not a reduction from any supposed $18 million but rather the final, sole award granted by the court,” the statement indicated, whilst noting with emphasis “Anas and his camp are desperately trying to twist the narrative to save face.”

“If it was never about the money, why did Anas originally ask for a whopping $30 million and attempt to portray Hon. Ken as a wealthy target who could easily foot the bill?” they asked rhetorically.

They were of the belief that “Anas’s agenda was clear from the start—cash in big while hiding behind sensationalism and unproven allegations,” and that “the court’s final decision, awarding a mere $500, underscores one undeniable truth: Anas failed to prove his case.”

“Hon. Ken Ohene Agyapong has always been a fearless advocate for justice and transparency, exposing corruption without hiding in the shadows. Unlike those who wear masks—both literally and figuratively—Hon. Ken has faced his detractors openly and honestly,” the statement said.

According to them, “the fight was never about money or silencing journalism” but rather “about standing firm against character assassination and defending one’s integrity,” insisting “Hon. Ken Ohene Agyapong has proven that truth cannot be bought or twisted, no matter the schemes employed.”