Is Akufo-Addo a Victim of Free Speech?

Read Article

Comments (68)

This article is closed for comments.

Read Comments Comments (68)

Kwaku Azar 10 years ago

"Will the SC contempt of court judgement stop false, baseless but very damaging accusations against Nana Akufo Addo and other politicians?"

Kofi, the answer is NO. The Supreme Court could jail all Ghanaians and that will n ...
read full comment

"Will the SC contempt of court judgement stop false, baseless but very damaging accusations against Nana Akufo Addo and other politicians?"

Kofi, the answer is NO. The Supreme Court could jail all Ghanaians and that will not stop us from saying what is on our mind.

Nor is such irresponsible attacks on and insults of politicians unique to Ghana, as you seem to suggest. Worst things are said about politicians in western democracies. Do you know what Obama is subject to?

Incidentally, there is no equivalence between these useless insults directed at politicians and harsh but fair criticisms of judges, as done by Awuku and Kuranchie.

As a matter of law, both are not punishable. As a matter of redemption, there is no social value in the insults. But judges must be held accountable and it is universally accepted that such harsh, even offensive, criticism is permissible.

There is market segmentation in the media. Consumers self-select what they will buy and read. I hardly know who is being insulted because I stop reading the moment I sense that somebody is insulting another.

Others believe in UFO. They live on tabloid junk. They will not read unless they sense some sleaze.

Free speech is a protected right not because we are worried that people will say nice things. Free speech is protected exactly because we want to assure the liberty of those who will say bizarre things.

The likelihood of a politician winning a defamation suit in the west is almost zero. Insults are never defamatory. You are a fool is not defamatory. You are a hypocrite is not defamatory. Defamatory requires malice.

People spend too much time glorifying useless speech. The key is to ignore such speech. Why repeat all the scurrilous allegations in this article? You are given oxygen to the garbage.

Free speech is not responsible speech. Free speech is free speech.
KWADWO OWUSU 10 years ago

Mr. Kwaku Azar, ask yourself if the incarceration of armed robbers has stopped armed robbery. What the Supreme Court is doing is arrest a "dangerous mischief", ie irresponsible political hacks creating a fertile environment f ...
read full comment

Mr. Kwaku Azar, ask yourself if the incarceration of armed robbers has stopped armed robbery. What the Supreme Court is doing is arrest a "dangerous mischief", ie irresponsible political hacks creating a fertile environment for civil strife in the event that the Supreme Court's decision does not go their way.

For anybody to think that free speech does not have its limitation while a case is pending before a court is to oversell his or her understanding of that right. That is why "free speech is not free speech" as you want readers to believe.

Why should any court of competent jurisdiction allow irresponsible and dangerous comments to undermine the integrity of administration of justice? Any comment calculated to lessen the efficacy of a court's order and interfer in the administration of justice while a case is pending is punishable by contempt of court.

Free speech is not free speech.
BRAVEBOY 10 years ago

Free speech is Free Speech. It is only that my rights stops where your rights starts. That is called fairness. We are social animals with individual aspirations and yet we must co-exist in peace. The purpose of Free Speech is ...
read full comment

Free speech is Free Speech. It is only that my rights stops where your rights starts. That is called fairness. We are social animals with individual aspirations and yet we must co-exist in peace. The purpose of Free Speech is peace and happiness, let us not forget that.
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

If you think free speech is free speech, don't be showing your clout here on ghanaweb. Go to the SC and talk to them anyhow you like because free speech is free speech.

Then you claim your right stops where mine starts? W ...
read full comment

If you think free speech is free speech, don't be showing your clout here on ghanaweb. Go to the SC and talk to them anyhow you like because free speech is free speech.

Then you claim your right stops where mine starts? What does that even mean? If you believe sincerely that "We are social animals with individual aspirations and yet we must co-exist in peace", what makes you think free speech, being free speech, means you can say anything against anyone and go scot-free? Take a cue: when ken kuranchie tried to prove to NINE SUPREME COURT JUDGES that he knows what free speech is more than them, he found himself in jail.
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

You have inadvertently made the case for free speech.

You are rather inviting the individual to fear the SC instead of respecting it. That is the problem with curtailing free speech without proofing the offence!

You have inadvertently made the case for free speech.

You are rather inviting the individual to fear the SC instead of respecting it. That is the problem with curtailing free speech without proofing the offence!
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

A law is a law. Do not make pronouncements on a case that is ongoing in a court of law. How difficult is it to understand that? I'm not asking him to fear the SC. If you respect something, you are civil in the way you deal wi ...
read full comment

A law is a law. Do not make pronouncements on a case that is ongoing in a court of law. How difficult is it to understand that? I'm not asking him to fear the SC. If you respect something, you are civil in the way you deal with it. You do not call SC judges "hypocrites" and expect them to think you were "respecting" them. Would you consider it "respect" if someone tells you you are a hypocrite just becuz you were doing your work?
Kwaku Azar 10 years ago

"Do not make pronouncements on a case that is ongoing in a court of law."

If this is the Law then they should build a prison to house all Ghanaians because all of us, including the President, have broken the law

"Do not make pronouncements on a case that is ongoing in a court of law."

If this is the Law then they should build a prison to house all Ghanaians because all of us, including the President, have broken the law
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

I like your analytical skills! You obviously know all of these more than every other person; including even the judges! That's why I said you people have an understanding of "freedom of speech" which all other Ghanaians inclu ...
read full comment

I like your analytical skills! You obviously know all of these more than every other person; including even the judges! That's why I said you people have an understanding of "freedom of speech" which all other Ghanaians including the nine SC judges are unable to comprehend. I think I should back you, let's support kuranchie so he can fight his case; let's send the judges rather to jail!
Kojo T 10 years ago

I carefully watched the analysis of martin trevorn on CNN and the way the went about it. It was all about the evidence and what should and what should not have been said. You guys concenrate on the judges, insult the lawyers ...
read full comment

I carefully watched the analysis of martin trevorn on CNN and the way the went about it. It was all about the evidence and what should and what should not have been said. You guys concenrate on the judges, insult the lawyers and twist the facts.
KWADWO OWUSU 10 years ago

Dr Ohemeng, I am rather battled at the suggestion is that the Supreme Court is intimidating citizens with the contempt citation against those contemnors. What has been made clear by the Supreme Court is that you are at libert ...
read full comment

Dr Ohemeng, I am rather battled at the suggestion is that the Supreme Court is intimidating citizens with the contempt citation against those contemnors. What has been made clear by the Supreme Court is that you are at liberty to comment on this case but be truthful and forthright and don't do anything to undermine our authority or order. Unless, I am don't understand what the SC said.
Kwaku Azar 10 years ago

"What the Supreme Court is doing is arrest a "dangerous mischief", ie irresponsible political hacks creating a fertile environment for civil strife in the event that the Supreme Court's decision does not go their way."

Th ...
read full comment

"What the Supreme Court is doing is arrest a "dangerous mischief", ie irresponsible political hacks creating a fertile environment for civil strife in the event that the Supreme Court's decision does not go their way."

The problem with this type of argument is that it misunderstands the powers of the Supreme Court. The Court's job is not to imagine what mischiefs could occur and then arrest it. The Court's job is to do justice. Let us hope that the Court does not ignore the evidence before them and give a decision which they hope will arrest political mischief.

Second, the argument assumes the citizens are fools and if you allow them to make comments they will start killing themselves. Third, the argument assume there are trouble makers who can be stopped merely by silencing them. It makes no sense to assume that asking a trouble maker not to freely say what is on his mind will transform him into a peace maker.

In the case of a court, the right to criticize is the only mechanism to hold judges accountable. If Judges can decide how we can criticize them then they have become a LAW unto themselves.

Sometimes, it is necessary for purposes of a fair trial to issue a gag order. Such an order must be clear, definite and unambiguous. Further, such orders are needed in the case of a jury trial to avoid what is called trial by media. However, any judge should be able to ignore the rantings in the media and so in a trial by judges, such a gag order is not necessary.

Comments that undermine the administration of justice are of course not protected. But saying that a judge is being selective and hypocritical is an opinion that is not only protected but has no effect on the administration of justice.

And someone saying that he will not follow the order of the Court is of no consequence when that person is not a party to the dispute and the Court has not issued any order.

No right is absolute does not mean the Court has an unlimited power to send people to jail.

Further, the Court's powers are not absolute. They are very limited.

Parliament too has the power to cite for contempt. Should it abuse the power like this Supreme Court
YB 10 years ago

That's a brilliant response, Sir. I'm certain that one day you will be vindicated.

That's a brilliant response, Sir. I'm certain that one day you will be vindicated.
John Daniels- Toronto 10 years ago

Azar you missed the singular point that Kofi was trying to make. He is referring to the effect of free speech " in a context". No singular right ( even the right to die or self-defense) can be taken in isolation the context ...
read full comment

Azar you missed the singular point that Kofi was trying to make. He is referring to the effect of free speech " in a context". No singular right ( even the right to die or self-defense) can be taken in isolation the context is very important. In fact Mr Kuranchie can for instance organize a Seminar on the effectiveness SC judges anytime he wants as long as it not against the National interest as clearly stipulated by no other body but an institution of the state like the supreme court. Similarly, Nana could easily have taken the case of the young man to court (in fact he still can if he want) but he chose otherwise.
Kwaku Azar 10 years ago

I think people should stop talking about rights not being absolute. Everybody knows that! Even the right to live is not absolute.

The argument is the right is not absolute and so what next? Does that give a Judge the power ...
read full comment

I think people should stop talking about rights not being absolute. Everybody knows that! Even the right to live is not absolute.

The argument is the right is not absolute and so what next? Does that give a Judge the power to send you to jail when you say the Judge is not following the Constitution?

Does that give the Court the power to send you to jail when you say the Court is being selective in picking on articles in the newspaper but not the internet?

Everyone has the right to sue for defamation if he feels someone has made some untrue remarks about him that damages his reputation. But the standards to be used in determining guilt depends on whether the plaintiff is a public official or not.

Accountability is very important and so people are allowed maximum flexibility in criticizing public officials.

Further, Ghanaians have decided that no matter how harmful speech is, nobody should go to jail for that.
KWADWO OWUSU 10 years ago

Mr. Kwaku Azar, I don't think the Supreme Court in dealing with these contempt cases said it has the power to send people to jail for merely criticizing them. What it said was that you are at liberty to pass comments on the p ...
read full comment

Mr. Kwaku Azar, I don't think the Supreme Court in dealing with these contempt cases said it has the power to send people to jail for merely criticizing them. What it said was that you are at liberty to pass comments on the proceedings but do so honestly. Any thing done and calculated to interfer the administration of justice or calculated to undermine the integrity of the court's power will be treated as contempt.

Unless, of course, I did not understand the court's touchline order. If so, can you please let me know?
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

kwaku, I'm surprised you claim "You are a fool is not defamatory". Your dictionary says so? "Free speech is not responsible speech. Free speech is free speech"? Are you serious? Should a law be made for "responsible speech"? ...
read full comment

kwaku, I'm surprised you claim "You are a fool is not defamatory". Your dictionary says so? "Free speech is not responsible speech. Free speech is free speech"? Are you serious? Should a law be made for "responsible speech"? People like you see yourselves are the "all-knowing" type who only see the wrong when it goes against you. I dont know what you do or where you work but, reading all this you wrote over here, I'm sure you wouldnt mind if someone, who is not a professional at what you do, comes to your workplace and tells you you are not doing your work well. What makes some of you think you know the law more than the people who made the law for you? Go back, do some reading, get your facts in place before you come here spewing all this nonsense!
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

You sure can use some unpalatable language! You are doing this and yet defending the curbing of free speech? You are exercising that right and yet you are calling for it to be curtailed. This is called hyprocricy!

There ar ...
read full comment

You sure can use some unpalatable language! You are doing this and yet defending the curbing of free speech? You are exercising that right and yet you are calling for it to be curtailed. This is called hyprocricy!

There are legal means of seeking redress for irresponsible speech but it must be proven to be so. If you incite hatred, there are laws to deal with that. If you defame someone, he can sue you for libel. But for a court to curtail free speech in a manner, which is not clear, is dangerous.
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

I don't see what is unpalatable in what I wrote. Did you read what he said before my response? In any case, you people are the advocates of what you call "free speech" (something only you people seem to know exactly what it m ...
read full comment

I don't see what is unpalatable in what I wrote. Did you read what he said before my response? In any case, you people are the advocates of what you call "free speech" (something only you people seem to know exactly what it mean). The man claim he doesnt consider "You are a fool" as defamatory language. I'm pretty sure he wouldnt mind me saying all he wrote is nonsense!
Kwaku Azar 10 years ago

The comments you made here, is with due respect, the type of speech that is protected. In my opinion, there is nothing logical about what you wrote. It is all emotional. But the law believes society is better by letting you v ...
read full comment

The comments you made here, is with due respect, the type of speech that is protected. In my opinion, there is nothing logical about what you wrote. It is all emotional. But the law believes society is better by letting you ventilate than by suppressing your speech
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

For one minute, take me for a complete ignoramus and educate me: what kind of language is defamatory to you? Which type do you consider logical and unemotional? Which type of speech is protected? and by who?

Of course, I d ...
read full comment

For one minute, take me for a complete ignoramus and educate me: what kind of language is defamatory to you? Which type do you consider logical and unemotional? Which type of speech is protected? and by who?

Of course, I don't expect my comments to sound logical to you! Why would they? You are the person who find language like "You are a fool" very acceptable. Now you telling me about what is logical?
YB 10 years ago

Mate, you appear to be very educated but you have failed to apply simple logic here. What language would you consider as "not contemptible"? Judges are not superior beings and their actions can be criticized... simplicita? Si ...
read full comment

Mate, you appear to be very educated but you have failed to apply simple logic here. What language would you consider as "not contemptible"? Judges are not superior beings and their actions can be criticized... simplicita? Since 2009, the Chief Justice and the Bench have faced harsh, scandalous criticisms and insults, and they have taken it without charging any person for contempt. The Prof didn't call for any of these fool soldiers to be cited for contempt, so it is only fair to say he is very consistent.

What about you? Can you put away your partisan lens and see things for what they are instead of deliberately infecting people with your inferior comments?
Saka 10 years ago

But where after a ruling on a case, you go telling all and sundry that a jdge is selective and hypocritical, you are undoubtedly being contemptuous of the court's ruling, and you must be dealt with accordingly.

But where after a ruling on a case, you go telling all and sundry that a jdge is selective and hypocritical, you are undoubtedly being contemptuous of the court's ruling, and you must be dealt with accordingly.
Paul Amuna 10 years ago

Kwaku, remember the supreme court's actions with regards to contempt are SPECIFICALLY related to the case currently being dealt with in court.

Interestingly enough, if a good swirl of citizens wrote to the court to compl ...
read full comment

Kwaku, remember the supreme court's actions with regards to contempt are SPECIFICALLY related to the case currently being dealt with in court.

Interestingly enough, if a good swirl of citizens wrote to the court to complain about how people like Akufo-Addo (and the president for that matter) are being portrayed (grossly unfairly in my view) by some idiots across the political divide and general public; and if such a LETTER asked the court to look into the matter in the NATIONAL INTEREST and DEFENCE OF THE RIGHTS OF THE AGGRIEVED.

Alternatively if Nana (or any other person so aggrieved) were to WRITE to the court seeking action and redress, or if they were to sue for libel, it would be interesting to see how the courts respond to such actions.

Kwaku, it is in such circumstances that I believe citizens may have the right to WRITE to the court (or SC) and I will personally regard such letters as justified and appropriate.
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 10 years ago

Azar, the question I posed was a rhetorical one not meant to be answered. I am fully aware that abuse, insults and baseless accusations, etc of politicians is not unique to Ghana. We have discussed that in one of our telephon ...
read full comment

Azar, the question I posed was a rhetorical one not meant to be answered. I am fully aware that abuse, insults and baseless accusations, etc of politicians is not unique to Ghana. We have discussed that in one of our telephone conversation as well as what has been happening to Obama in the US and we both agreed that it's pure racist and not the normal politics. I also mentioned that, here in UK, politicians are peddled with eggs, with flour, paint and others thrown at them. However, defamatory and libelous accusations are challenged and are not as common. For example, to accuse a politician of urinating on a mosque when that did not happen is libelous and would not go unchallenged here. To accuse a married politician that he is having an affair with another woman and as a result the woman's wedding had to be held in secrecy are not insults but libelous and defamatory.

I am also in no illusion that the politics of insults, abuse, baseless and libelous accusations will stop in Ghana because of the jailing of Atugiba and Kuranchie but I am hopefully that form that day forward, people will be a bit careful in throwing such accusations at their political opponents. In fact, even in the western developed democracies such insults and abuse have not been eliminated, at best they have been refined.

The debate is certainly good and healthy so we should continue.
JUSTINE 10 years ago

SHUT THE FUCK UP, DEAR BLIND ADVOCATE OF AKUFFO ADDO. THAT MAN IS SO PRONE TO DISASTER AND HIS HANDLERS TRY TO COVER HIM. AND THE COVER IS DO BADLY DONE THAT HE IS EXPOSED IN A WAY THAT COULD BE AVOIDED. JUST TWO EXAMPLES. HE ...
read full comment

SHUT THE FUCK UP, DEAR BLIND ADVOCATE OF AKUFFO ADDO. THAT MAN IS SO PRONE TO DISASTER AND HIS HANDLERS TRY TO COVER HIM. AND THE COVER IS DO BADLY DONE THAT HE IS EXPOSED IN A WAY THAT COULD BE AVOIDED. JUST TWO EXAMPLES. HE WAS CAUGHT BY THE CAMERA TRYING TO FONDLE SOMEBODY'S WIFE AT A TV STUDIO. HE APPEARED AS TALL AS THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES OF THE LAST ELECTIONS. YOU SEE SOME OF THESE THINGS CANNOT BE DEFENDED AND THEREFORE THINGS HAVE TO BE HANDLED WELL BY THE PEOPLE AROUND HIM. BUT IT SEEMS THE PEOPLE AROUND NANA ARE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD NOT CONFUSE US ALSO ABOUT HIS RECENT HOSPITALISATION. INDEED, I DONT SEE ANY PROBLEM IF A MAN HAS HEART PROBLEMS, BUT THIS FACT WAS HANDLED AS IF NANA WAS SUFFERING FROM SOMETHING ELSE. SO DONT BLAME ANYONE. I DONT SEE THE POINT OF YOUR ESSAY
Wubugu 10 years ago

Justine,people of your stature are not needed whem men like Kofi Ata or Kwaku Azar writes. Please read them,but go elsewhere and spew your low cuts. Your comments are unwanted.

Justine,people of your stature are not needed whem men like Kofi Ata or Kwaku Azar writes. Please read them,but go elsewhere and spew your low cuts. Your comments are unwanted.
Cecil Adu-Damoah, USA 10 years ago

The Supreme Court's actions are nothing, but intimidation. Whoever attempts to suppress Freedom of expression and the press, lacks a good understanding of what democracy is all about. People speak out their minds because t ...
read full comment

The Supreme Court's actions are nothing, but intimidation. Whoever attempts to suppress Freedom of expression and the press, lacks a good understanding of what democracy is all about. People speak out their minds because they are rational. A simple definition of democracy is, "a government by the people,"so it is a right their constitution gives them. A healthy democracy is one which encourages freedom of speech and the press, the SC should realize that.
John Daniels- Toronto 10 years ago

The textbook definition you have give has absolutely no basis in real life. Just show me 10 example where this has worked and I shall show you 200 from the same place where it hasn't. Your freedom of expression is tolerable o ...
read full comment

The textbook definition you have give has absolutely no basis in real life. Just show me 10 example where this has worked and I shall show you 200 from the same place where it hasn't. Your freedom of expression is tolerable only within the broader concept of the civil well-being. It seems you are residing in the US. Here is a simple test, I want you to go to the nearest Mall and start repeating this statement: "I AM A TERRORIST" and just watch how quickly your simplistic definition of democracy and freedom of speech will last. How Naive can Ghanaians of a certain class can be !!
Saka 10 years ago

Freedom of speech is no license to denigrating a court's ruling or saying things to prejudice a court's proceedings. Doing that amounts to being lawless. But where laws exist and operate to order the reckless behaviour of law ...
read full comment

Freedom of speech is no license to denigrating a court's ruling or saying things to prejudice a court's proceedings. Doing that amounts to being lawless. But where laws exist and operate to order the reckless behaviour of lawless citizens, any body who engages in such irrisponsible and misconceived freedom of speech will be dealt wit by the law. The normal thing for anybody to do, if he thinks the law has been misapplied in any court's ruling is to use the appropriate means, such as an appeal to a higher court, or call for a review of the court's ruling, if it is the SC.
Kojo 10 years ago

oh yeah akufo addo is wrongly accused? what above him falsely accusing Mahamah of theft. why don't you write about that? you claim akufo brought freedom of speech to Ghana. can you hear yourself? this is the man who said all ...
read full comment

oh yeah akufo addo is wrongly accused? what above him falsely accusing Mahamah of theft. why don't you write about that? you claim akufo brought freedom of speech to Ghana. can you hear yourself? this is the man who said all-die-be-die. and that he and his people will make Ghana ungovernable. these alone have washed if any, things he might have done. I pity you for waking up and still be dreaming. you have been exposed for your deeds.
De Prince Collectionz 10 years ago

At De Prince Collectionz, we sell high quality ladies and gents clothes, shoes and accessories at affordable prices.
Please go to our website (www.deprincecollectionz.webs.com) and browse through the web pages, if you see an ...
read full comment

At De Prince Collectionz, we sell high quality ladies and gents clothes, shoes and accessories at affordable prices.
Please go to our website (www.deprincecollectionz.webs.com) and browse through the web pages, if you see any item that you would love to buy just call us on +233 230 269 388 for direction.

We have new stocks that just arrived Accra, Lagos and Port Harcourt this week so its important you contact us while stocks are available:

We promise to give you high quality shoes, clothes and accessories at affordable prices. Our contact details are listed below:

Facebook: www.facebook.com/de.prince.7796
Website: www.deprincecollectionz.webs.com
Twitter: www.twitter.com/PrinzColectionz
Skype: deprince.collectionz
Phone +233 230 269 388
ABBEY 10 years ago

KOFI ATA,I HAVE LOVED READING YOUR ARTICLES BUT MOST OF THE TIME YOU ADD POLITICAL COLORS WHICH MAKE ME ASSOCIATE YOU VERY MUCH WITH THE DANQUAH/BUSIA TRADITION, BUT WHO REALLY CARES?.YOU'RE A HUMAN BEING & YOU'RE ENTITLED TO ...
read full comment

KOFI ATA,I HAVE LOVED READING YOUR ARTICLES BUT MOST OF THE TIME YOU ADD POLITICAL COLORS WHICH MAKE ME ASSOCIATE YOU VERY MUCH WITH THE DANQUAH/BUSIA TRADITION, BUT WHO REALLY CARES?.YOU'RE A HUMAN BEING & YOU'RE ENTITLED TO ANY POLITICAL PARTY OF YOUR CHOICE. TO YOUR QUESTION, AKUFFO ADDO IS NEVER A VICTIM OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH. APART FROM HIS SENSELESS & RECKLESS STATEMENTS OF "ALL DIE BE DIE & "I MUST WIN THE ELECTION AT ALL COST " WHICH NATURALLY MUST ATTRACT CONDEMNATION, I HAVEN'T HEARD NANA ADDO BEING CRITICISED OF ANY PUBLIC UTTERANCE. I RATHER EXPECT PEOPLE LIKE YOU TO BE ASKING QUESTIONS LIKE WHY NANA ADDO WOULD NEVER, EVER COME OUT PUBLICLY TO ACCEPT OR DENY ACCUSATIONS ABOUT HIS CHARACTER. THREE (3)TYPICAL EXAMPLES. (1)ACCUSED OF BEING A DRUG ADDICT WHICH WAS ALSO ECHOED BY WIKILEAKS & CONFIRMED BY KWESI PRATT JR & DR AMOAH. (2)WHY HE DISAPPEARED FROM OXFORD & NEVER HAD IT ON HIS CV & (3)THE FACT THAT HE IS PRACTICING LAW IN GHANA THROUGH FAMILY CONNECTIONS BECAUSE HE DIDN'T ATTEND ANY LAW SCHOOL IN GHANA. INSTEAD OF GOING TO COURT TO PROVE HIS INNOCENCE, HE COMMANDED THE THE WHOLE JUDICIAL PROCESS IN GHANA TO STRIKE OUT THE CASE,AGAIN THROUGH FAMILY CONNECTIONS AS USUAL. SO WHAT IS AKUFFO ADDO & PEOPLE LIKE YOU PRETENDING TO BE NEUTRAL TAKING GHANAIANS FOR? .A TYPICAL GEORGE OWELL IN GHANA, FOUR LEGS BAD,TWO LEGS GOOD. THIS IS WHAT IS STAGNATING OUR COUNTRY. IF ANY OTHER PERSON, ESPECIALLY AN NDC MEMBER IS THE ONE BEING ACCUSED OF THE 3 INSTANCES I HAVE MADE ABOVE, THE ISSUE WOULD STILL BE A HOT CAKE. TELL ME KOFI ATA,WITH THE 3 ACCUSATIONS STATED ABOVE, IF IT WERE IN LONDON, WOULD AKUFFO ADDO BE ANY WHERE NEAR EVEN HIS PARTY 'S NOMINATION AS A CANDIDATE? .IT'S ABSOLUTELY NO!.THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WHITE MAN & A BLACK MAN.OUR MIND IS AS BLACK AS OUR SKIN. THIS IS WHY WHITES WILL NEVER SEE ANYTHING GOOD ABOUT THE BLACK MAN.
KOKU AMEVOR 10 years ago

I AM SHOCKED SOMEONE CAN BRAND THIS WRITER AS NPP, I WAS EVEN INCLINED TO SUSPECT HE IS NDC TRYING TO BALANCE THE SCALES, BECAUSE I WONDER AT WHAT FALSEHOOD HAS BEEN PEDDLED AGAIST AN NDC LEADER TO HIS INJURY? KUFFUIR LOST A ...
read full comment

I AM SHOCKED SOMEONE CAN BRAND THIS WRITER AS NPP, I WAS EVEN INCLINED TO SUSPECT HE IS NDC TRYING TO BALANCE THE SCALES, BECAUSE I WONDER AT WHAT FALSEHOOD HAS BEEN PEDDLED AGAIST AN NDC LEADER TO HIS INJURY? KUFFUIR LOST A $100,000 PRIZE BECAUSE OF A FALSEHOOD PEDDLED BY NDC, ONLY FOR THE PEDDLERS TO APPOLOGIZE LATTER.IT IS TIME A CLEAR LINE BE DRAWN BETWEEN FREE SPEACH AND LIBEL.KOFI ANNAN SUED IN THE US WHEN HE WAS SMEARED IN HIS SON'S ISSUESIN AN IRAQ CONTRACT SCANDAL.IT IS TIME OUR GHANAIAN LEADERS FOLLOWED SUIT AND ALL LIBELOUS PERSONS AND THOSE GUILTY OF PERJURY JAILED.
BRAVEBOY 10 years ago

Kofi... I admire your attempt to try and stay on the path of objectivity, but what you must realize is that, the SC Judges themselves on numerous occasions warned people, particularly, the journalists to stop spreading lies a ...
read full comment

Kofi... I admire your attempt to try and stay on the path of objectivity, but what you must realize is that, the SC Judges themselves on numerous occasions warned people, particularly, the journalists to stop spreading lies and serious comments that will endanger the whole court proceedings.

We have not seen nothing yet. In fact, a clever lawyer could use such public utterances to quash a case in court altogether and that is why we need some decorum in the reportage of the impending case before the SC.

The choice of words could be the difference between a fair criticism and contempt ( The word Contempt means disrespect, disdain) of court.

I sometimes wonder if it is the same people who celebrate the memory of the three martyred Judges, who go about denigrating the image of the current sitting Judges.
Yes! bad comments can also endanger the lives of the Judges, especially, with our past record in history.
I wonder if you recently heard the spate of killings of Texas Attorneys in the USA because of past prosecutions and judgments issued out to criminal individuals.

It is true Judges are not angels and therefore prone, like any of us, to errors, yet it is agreed worldwide, that for the interest of fair(NOT NECESSARY PERFECT)judgment, Judges should be accorded some respect and protection from free unguarded expression during( I repeat during) court cases. After all, there's a chance to seek retrial after the case thanks to Mr. Mubila ( not Sure of the PNC man's name)

On the issue of Nana Addo being a victim of his own match for freedom of expression, I will like to equally ask some questions.
Is Dr. Wereku Brobbey a victim of free expression within the NPP?
Is Nana Addo the only one who wanted that Colonial libel Law gone?

Why did they choose to amend instead of scrapping the Libel Law altogether?

Politics everywhere is a dirty game and in fact in some countries politicians actually exchange punches. If someone claims to be perfect and he/she are not, people will vilify you.

The best politician is the one who is clever at turning his negative image into a positive one and that involves a high amount of clarity(openness) and truthfulness. There're a number of politicians who are good at vilifying opponents and yet forget that, he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

We embarked on this journey to seek redress from our courts. It commands a certain amount of trust and respect to the courts and I hope this case ends with a higher sense of respect and trust in the court systems not necessarily the persons who occupy that office. This is the only way to tell judges to behave fairly and people to seek redress in court and not on the streets of vigilante justices.

For the politicians, I say, politics is a give and take affair and you must be ready to give as well as take, but if you set the path on slippery grounds, then be prepared to walk that slippery ground.
Mimi 10 years ago

Excellent response

Excellent response
Goliath 10 years ago

I am sure time will prove Nana Addo right...as more and more people go to court to take on media houses and others who forget that our freedom of speech is sacrosanct ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT WE DO NOT TRAMPLE ON THE RIGHTS OF ...
read full comment

I am sure time will prove Nana Addo right...as more and more people go to court to take on media houses and others who forget that our freedom of speech is sacrosanct ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT WE DO NOT TRAMPLE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO THEIR GOOD REPUTATION !
ODIKRO 10 years ago

SO KOFI YOU THINK THAT NANA AKUFO ADDO HAS BEEN MORE VILIFIED THAN MAHAMA DO YOU? WHEN YOU BASE YOUR ARGUMENT ON FALSE PREMISES, ONE IS NOT SUPRISED THAT YOUR CONCLUSION BECOMES A JOKE. WAS IT RIGHT FOR NANA TO PUSH THE ALL D ...
read full comment

SO KOFI YOU THINK THAT NANA AKUFO ADDO HAS BEEN MORE VILIFIED THAN MAHAMA DO YOU? WHEN YOU BASE YOUR ARGUMENT ON FALSE PREMISES, ONE IS NOT SUPRISED THAT YOUR CONCLUSION BECOMES A JOKE. WAS IT RIGHT FOR NANA TO PUSH THE ALL DIE BE DIE MANTRA? SHOULD JAKE (WHO FORGOT HIS ROOTS AND CLAIMED HE WAS AN AKAN)HAVE COMPARED US AKANS TO THE WAR IN IVORY COAST? URSULLA PRAISED PEOPLE WHO SAID THE NPP SUPPORTERS SHOULD GO OUT AND CAUSE MAYHEM,TORCHING BUILDINGS AND BLOCKING TRAFFIC etc. A MAN WAS TOASTED ON PUBLIC PLATFORM FOR SLAPPING AN OPOSITION GUY. DOES THIS FREEDOM OF SPEECH NOT COVER MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT THESE DOCTORS, TEACHERS, PHARMACISTS etc. DECIDING TO STRIKE ONLY DURING NDC GOVERNMENT'S TENURE? COINCIDENCE? DREAM ON.
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

"Will the SC contempt of court judgement stop false, baseless but very damaging accusations against Nana Akufo Addo and other politicians?" I find that statement so unfortunate! If laws are not meant to be obeyed, what's the ...
read full comment

"Will the SC contempt of court judgement stop false, baseless but very damaging accusations against Nana Akufo Addo and other politicians?" I find that statement so unfortunate! If laws are not meant to be obeyed, what's the point in having them? If state institutions and machinery are not of any value, why do we set them up? Why are the police recruited to ensure law enforcement? To insinuate that the institutions set up to regulate human behaviour cannot change people and the way the behave, like how ken kuranchie claimed, is a very wrong perception. Its just like saying people would break laws so there is no need having laws. If the SC cannot stop such bad behaviour, please tell us what would!
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

I have heard and read lots of people saying the law prescribes something and that Kuranchie flouted that law.

Can you in layman terms tell us: what this law is; where it is written; what behaviours are permitted under this ...
read full comment

I have heard and read lots of people saying the law prescribes something and that Kuranchie flouted that law.

Can you in layman terms tell us: what this law is; where it is written; what behaviours are permitted under this law.

Secondly, can you tell us exactly (maybe a quote will suffice) what Kuranchie wrote that made him fall foul of this law. At the moment we seem to have jumped on this law bandwagon.

Those who disagree with what the SC did have written very persuasive articles. Who is going to write for those in favour whose only refrain has been the law, the law, the law, without demonstrating anything?
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

Dr., I can see u unto me so I'll do u the favour. You don't need to defend what is right! Those in favour of the SC punishment for kuranchie dont have to prove anything. The onus is on he who alleges to prove his case. If you ...
read full comment

Dr., I can see u unto me so I'll do u the favour. You don't need to defend what is right! Those in favour of the SC punishment for kuranchie dont have to prove anything. The onus is on he who alleges to prove his case. If you people believe kuranchie was wrongly incarcerated, of course you have the right to go to court! And to answer your questions, the law he broke is called "contempt of court", it is written in Ghana's constitution and the behaviour that is rather not permitted under this law is that, do not make pronouncements on a case which is ongoing in a court of law!
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

You are ascribing to yourself that you've got it right and that others have got it wrong. You have offered no basis. There is no law in Ghana called 'contempt of court'. That is why Ace Ankomah was calling for Parliament to d ...
read full comment

You are ascribing to yourself that you've got it right and that others have got it wrong. You have offered no basis. There is no law in Ghana called 'contempt of court'. That is why Ace Ankomah was calling for Parliament to deal with that issue.

It is in the Constitution that Superior Courts may find people liable for contempt of itself. The same Constitition gives the freedom of expression right to every citizen. In fact it is the shortest article in the Constitution emphasising its importance. For even the Press, the Constitution frowns on interfering with this right. The constituiton uses the words: "for the avoidance of doubt", exercising the restriction should not be taken as limiting the enjoyment of fundamental human rights to freely express yourself.

This suggests to me that anyone seeking to curtail rights has to demonstrate the harm such restrictions are to prevent. To me the SC has not done that.
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

Firstly, if the constitution gives a superior court the powers to find people in contempt of itself and the SC finds kuranchie in contempt of itself, why are you people trying to defend him?

Secondly, (not you, Dr. per se) ...
read full comment

Firstly, if the constitution gives a superior court the powers to find people in contempt of itself and the SC finds kuranchie in contempt of itself, why are you people trying to defend him?

Secondly, (not you, Dr. per se)but your claims of "curtailing freedom of speech" sounds so strange! Don't people, even radio station all over the country, still talk about the proceedings in the SC? Do you think it is just out of hate or something that the SC singled out kuranchie and atubiga for punishment?

Thirdly, should the SC judges say because kuranchie has the right of freedom of speech so they cannot hold him in contempt? Yeah, Ghana's constitution might have lapses in them but responsible citizens (which kuranchie and atubiga appear to be) should not be taking advantages of those lapses to forment trouble.

This election petition has the potential to distabilize this country; we cannot afford people instilling in people's minds that figment of their imagination that the judges are being biased! Even if they are being biased, I don't think sitting on radio and calling them "hypocrites who are being selective" is the way to deal with it.

What's more, don't you find anything even ethically wrong with describing the judges of the SC as "hypocrites"? If you know they are hypocrites, why do you go to them seeking justice?

What awuku said is wrong; he went there and apologised; then kuranchie kind of took it upon himself to defend a wrong! If he believes he has been unfairly treated, I'm sure there is another legal means he can use to seek redress! He can go ahead! As Atta Akyea said, kuranchie is no toddler, he knows what he's doing: probably trying to be a bigger "hero" for the like of kofi jumah to copy!
Vuvuzela 10 years ago

You're very smart. Don't use the moniker you're actually using. Is it out of spite. I find your posts very appealing.

You're very smart. Don't use the moniker you're actually using. Is it out of spite. I find your posts very appealing.
BRAVEBOY 10 years ago

Dr. Ohemeng... both the petitioner's lawyer and respondent lawyers agreed for there to be a certain among of decorum in the media. Why? The constitution does not frown on it but takes into consideration our cultural values of ...
read full comment

Dr. Ohemeng... both the petitioner's lawyer and respondent lawyers agreed for there to be a certain among of decorum in the media. Why? The constitution does not frown on it but takes into consideration our cultural values of respect and expect us to achieve this without any problem. Why do you think Swonden is being hunted down by the USA? One must be wise in the execution of his/her freedom of speech so not to destroy its importance. It is all about time and place. We don't joke about death with a friend on a sick bed but on other days it might mean fun joking about the same thing.
Saka 10 years ago

Therefore Dr, kindly send a petition to the SC to review its position on this "Contempt" cases. That's the only way this constitutional dilemma will be cleared.

Therefore Dr, kindly send a petition to the SC to review its position on this "Contempt" cases. That's the only way this constitutional dilemma will be cleared.
Vuvuzela 10 years ago

I see that you're finding it very difficult to convince people about how to uphold laws and correct individual behavior.

Charlie, don't you know the country you are in? It is called Ghana. Need I say more?

Recently in ...
read full comment

I see that you're finding it very difficult to convince people about how to uphold laws and correct individual behavior.

Charlie, don't you know the country you are in? It is called Ghana. Need I say more?

Recently in Australia a Radio Presenter was forced to resign for asking questions that the public deemed sexy. In the USA a young guy's comment - in fact made to scorn some earlier comment - deemed offensive and the guy was jailed when he failed to pay a fine of about half a million. He was released just two days ago!

I have always stated that failure to enforce laws in Ghana resulted in the pitiful, undisciplined and lawless predicament we find ourselves in. Don't waste you time.
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

What the SC is doing is not with the aim of banishing false stories against certain personalities. So that will not stop even after the hearing. You can even see the mischief which is currently ongoing with the usual suspect' ...
read full comment

What the SC is doing is not with the aim of banishing false stories against certain personalities. So that will not stop even after the hearing. You can even see the mischief which is currently ongoing with the usual suspect' newspapers now policing statements on behalf of the SC. This has given them another avenue for setting up political opponents for contempt.

The SC claims to be safeguarding public security by their actions. But do they have the tools to do this? They do not command the army, neither do they command the police. To me, it seems they are over-reaching because our security agancies have become political tools.

The only way the SC can ensure that its decision is accepted, is not by jailing people who criticise, but by weighing the evidence before them and demonstrating that they applied the laws of the country in reaching a decision. Jailing somebody now does not mean that people are going to accept the eventual ruling if it is at
variance with the evidence before the court.

It is true that free speech has limitations but is restricted in very narrow terms. There are legal avenues for seeking redress if you have been defamed or falsely accused. Similarly statements that are seeking to incite are criminal offences that can be prosecuted, and if found guilty, are punishable.

My whole concern with the Awuku-Atubiga-Kuranchie issue is the procedure taken by the Court. Further, it is not clear from the oral order given by Justice Atuguba on the 24th of June how citizens are to conduct themselves with regards to making comments on the pending matter. Should all commentaries cease? Should commentaries only be favourable? As we speak, no one knows. It is like a trap has been set waiting to catch people!
John Daniels- Toronto 10 years ago

This is very surprising Dr. Ohemeng. I assume that you have some understanding of basic exercise in case management and controls especial the effect of prejudice. Unless you are trying to be one of these people who likes to h ...
read full comment

This is very surprising Dr. Ohemeng. I assume that you have some understanding of basic exercise in case management and controls especial the effect of prejudice. Unless you are trying to be one of these people who likes to hide behind the fear of some single specific events to becoming a contagion.
To answer your question, the NPP general secretariat have issued an 11-point guideline on proper conduct of speech and decorum. This guide for instance will appear surprisingly very basic and "common-sense" and should have been don long time ago.
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

Should it have been the duty of the NPP to prescribe behaviour or that of the court? In other jurisdictions, the court would have done this so that citizens can regulate their behaviour.

Will there be a defence by claimin ...
read full comment

Should it have been the duty of the NPP to prescribe behaviour or that of the court? In other jurisdictions, the court would have done this so that citizens can regulate their behaviour.

Will there be a defence by claiming in court that your behaviour was in consonance with the NPP guidelines? I do not think so because these are not directions from the court. That is why the Court should have taken this up and guided citizens appropriately.

The objective is to prevent prejudicious commentary and comments seeking to undermine the authority of the Court. So everything should be done to ensure that rather than sending people to jail. Why did the court not offer guidelines to avoid these? We cannot leave laws as traps for people to fall in. Let the Courts or their agents publish definitive guidelines and the country would be spared the anguish. if after these, people fall foul then it is proper to punish them.
BOY KOFI 10 years ago

The pink sheets served as the solely evidence exhibits is a gross failure on behalf of Nana Addo.The EC does not declare results based on the face of the pink sheets,my friend.The EC declares electoral results based on 3 soli ...
read full comment

The pink sheets served as the solely evidence exhibits is a gross failure on behalf of Nana Addo.The EC does not declare results based on the face of the pink sheets,my friend.The EC declares electoral results based on 3 solid elements,the pink sheets,collation forms and reports from the strong room.So why did Npp go to court with only pink sheets if they are really serious?Where are the collation forms and reports from the strong room?I am not a lawyer but I can tell you the pink sheets alone cannot change the results and that's logical because pink sheets go through corrections before the results are declared.Thank you.
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

Boy Kofi, it is clear that you have not followed the court case. The primary source of everything on the collation sheets and what comes from the strongroom is the pink sheets.

The NPP went to court, at the interlocutary s ...
read full comment

Boy Kofi, it is clear that you have not followed the court case. The primary source of everything on the collation sheets and what comes from the strongroom is the pink sheets.

The NPP went to court, at the interlocutary stage, for the court to compel the EC to produce all the collation sheets. The EC successfully defended this action. The Court ruled then that everything came from the pink sheets and that the EC did not have to produce. Further, the court held that the request was premature.

Later, only two weeks ago, the Petitioners requested for some, and the court again ruled against. Thus it has not been the NPP's wish not to rely on other electoral records, but the EC has refused to voluntarilty produce them. If they have nothing to hide, why refuse?

This is some of the rulings of the court that will be the subject of future commentary after the case has been discharged.
BOY KOFI 10 years ago

The EC refused because NPP is accusing them of rigging the elections without basis.Npp said they have mountain of evidence from the face of the pink sheets.Eventually,you agree with me that npp has no solid grounds without th ...
read full comment

The EC refused because NPP is accusing them of rigging the elections without basis.Npp said they have mountain of evidence from the face of the pink sheets.Eventually,you agree with me that npp has no solid grounds without the collation sheets and the strong room report.So why do you tell your supporters that you can win the petition with only pink sheets?Thank you.
Paul Amuna 10 years ago

Yaw (or shall I call you Dr Ohemeng?)you seem to ignore the fact that the petitioners ALSO argued (successfully) against the EC tendering in some biometric records and an original record to buttress their case during witness ...
read full comment

Yaw (or shall I call you Dr Ohemeng?)you seem to ignore the fact that the petitioners ALSO argued (successfully) against the EC tendering in some biometric records and an original record to buttress their case during witness testimony by Dr Afari Gyan. For goodness sake, why are you being selective? At the time, I (a lay person like most) argued that the petitioners by that very act had caused a blunder which would come back to haunt them.

The judges are not fools you know? You are creating the false impression that the judges have been biased in their ruling regarding 'compelling the EC' to tender original collation ("pink sheets"). Are you suggesting that the justices have been wrong in their ruling and / or that they intentionally refused petitioners against the law?

Rest assured, post verdict, I can guarantee you that there are those who will write on this case from a purely objective, non-biased and intellectual perspective to help educate us and provide new academic insights into electoral law and how it affects our democracy.

There are yet still those (from both sides of the political divide) who will write volumes on this case from their own narrow perspectives and give it the spin to buttress their arguments. Ultimately, history being what i is will judge the merits of this case not based on what the partisan writers say, but what neutral, objective yet critical thinkers and intellectuals write about it.

You can choose which side you will be on, but please stop patronising others and trying to create the impression you 'know the law' and others have either not been following proceedings or they are 'ignorant. BOY KOFI is an intelligent man and has been following this case alright like the rest of us and I doubt that you know or understand better than he does (irrespective of your personal credentials).
BOY KOFI 10 years ago

I am glad to read your lucid obsevation.Thank you very much.

I am glad to read your lucid obsevation.Thank you very much.
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

However, which came first? The Petitioners calling for production of all records, or the EC seeking to tender BVD records? I've never said the SC was bias. I thought asking the body with the statutory duty to keep electoral r ...
read full comment

However, which came first? The Petitioners calling for production of all records, or the EC seeking to tender BVD records? I've never said the SC was bias. I thought asking the body with the statutory duty to keep electoral records to produce them would have expedited the matter. We would not have had the long adjournment for KPMG to do a count.

There is this impression that if you do not sympathise with the respondents then you must be for the Petitioners. This is wrong. There are some of us who care that we try to eliminate some of the errors that all sides appear to agree that occurred.
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

That SC was biased.

That SC was biased.
nana addo dankwa akufo addo 10 years ago

First off, if you claim the SC doesnt have the "tools" to safeguard public security, then what's the essence of its existence? Should every arm of gov't have its own law enforcement body?

Of course, the ruling of the SC IS ...
read full comment

First off, if you claim the SC doesnt have the "tools" to safeguard public security, then what's the essence of its existence? Should every arm of gov't have its own law enforcement body?

Of course, the ruling of the SC IS NOT going to be accepted by everybody, we all know that. There is nothing the SC can do to, as you claim "ensure that its decision is accepted"! People would by all means have issue with it.

What we are and should be guarding against however, is the tendency of people like kuranchie to pollute people's minds ahead of the ruling! It's a recipe for chaos and it should be condemned by all peace loving people!
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

Is what Kuranchie wrote more than what Al-Hajj wrote? Going to the extent of mentioning the Registrar's name and accusing him of aiding the NPP to smuggle in evidence. If we are looking to those who are polluting minds, it is ...
read full comment

Is what Kuranchie wrote more than what Al-Hajj wrote? Going to the extent of mentioning the Registrar's name and accusing him of aiding the NPP to smuggle in evidence. If we are looking to those who are polluting minds, it is certainly not Kuranchie. He was only making commentary on a ruling.

What he said was even charitable. He wrote that since the SC does not have the means of policing all that is said and written, it would be seen as selective by some people. Some might have even see it, although unintentional, as hypocritical. This is an analysis for me.

That same weekend, on Newsfile, Gabby Darko defended the actions of the SC. He took the opposite view that, since the SC cannot police everything that is said and written, it was unfair for Sammy Awuku to accuse it of selectivity. My question is: why was Kuranchie held in contempt and not Gabby Darko? Is it not clear that the SC prefers favorable commentary to unfavourable ones?
Paul Amuna 10 years ago

You are either confused or seeking to confuse others by your narrow view of proceedings.

The Alhajj, and other equally vitriolic comments on the ongoing case PRECEDED the date the justices finally DREW THE LINE, after whi ...
read full comment

You are either confused or seeking to confuse others by your narrow view of proceedings.

The Alhajj, and other equally vitriolic comments on the ongoing case PRECEDED the date the justices finally DREW THE LINE, after which Awuku et al chose to OPENLY AND RUDELY DISOBEY the SC, hence their respective punishments. You also misrepresent Kuranchie's singular role in the matter.

His was not a mere "commentary" of the issue but one that questioned the very integrity of the court in taking its decision in respect of Awuku and seeking to portray them as wrong, biased and hypocritical. Added to that, his (and his advocate's) behaviour in court further confirmed his arrogance and lack of respect for the highest court of the land.

Surely you are not the only one watching proceedings, and I believe most fair-minded Ghanaians saw and heard what happened. So Dr Ohemeng, why do you continue trying so desperately hard (yet unsuccessfully) to 'throw dust' into the eyes of Ghanaians?

There are those who visit this forum who would (in my view erroneously) support your slant of the arguments, but trust me, most neutrals and fair mined people who simply want to know the truth and who wish our nation Ghana to be at ease with itself and for its peoples to be at peace and work in harmony, would not only be appalled by your wrong yet arrogant posture, but will fundamentally refuse to see your rather weak, pathetic and misleading take on the issues. Please stop it, it does not tally with your title Dr.
Dr Yaw Ohemeng 10 years ago

My dear Amuna, you choose to see what you see in the proceedings and you want to impose your on mine? And if I don't accept that, it is not befitting of a Ph.D?

I am sorry then you do not know how a Ph.D is earned. It is b ...
read full comment

My dear Amuna, you choose to see what you see in the proceedings and you want to impose your on mine? And if I don't accept that, it is not befitting of a Ph.D?

I am sorry then you do not know how a Ph.D is earned. It is by making an original contribution to knowledge. In my area of study, it is by either extending an existing body of knowledge or by disproving something and comning out with an alternative.

What this means is that you analyse situations for yourself, draw conclusions supported by evidence that you have gathered.

You see some of you advance nothing, make very simplistic pronouncements, informed by emotions, and you want others to adopt them. For some of you, you lie down for people vested with authority to trample upon you. I do not belong to that camp. I have my God-given right to analyse issues and conclude. You may not agree with it, but you are at liberty to assemble your facts and conclude differently. That is the essence of what we are doing here. Next time do not cast aspersions on people for their views - convince them as to why you are right supported by facts.
TRUTHPREFECT 10 years ago

NANA AND HIS CRONIES FROM THE AKIM AREA ARE TOO MUCH INTO A TURN IN OFFICE THAT THEY HAVE COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY IGNORED THEIR OWN. WHERE WERE THEY WHEN THE ROAD TO KUMASI WAS BEING PLANNED? HOW COME KYEBI HAS BECOME A BY-PAS ...
read full comment

NANA AND HIS CRONIES FROM THE AKIM AREA ARE TOO MUCH INTO A TURN IN OFFICE THAT THEY HAVE COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY IGNORED THEIR OWN. WHERE WERE THEY WHEN THE ROAD TO KUMASI WAS BEING PLANNED? HOW COME KYEBI HAS BECOME A BY-PASS? DESTRUCTIVE GALAMSEY AROUND KYEBI IS UNBELIEVABLE. YOU WILL SEE IT AND WILL NEVER BELIEVE THAT IF PEOPLE CANNOT LOOK AFTER THEIR OWN BACKYARD, THEY CAN ASK FOR THE WHOLE OF GHANA TO BE ENTRUSTED TO THEM. GO AND SEE THE CONDITION OF THE ROAD KUFFOUR BUILT SOME 6 YEARS AGO BEFORE REACHING LINDA D'OR. THE POT HOLES ARE UNBELIEVABLE IN BOTH SIZE AND QUANTITY. ARE THERE NO PEOPLE NATIVE TO THE AREA WHO CAN MAKE SOME COMPLAINTS? NO INDIGINES WHO CAN SEE THE POOR STATE AND THE DANGER TO LIFE? 2 DAYS AGO THERE WAS A LOT OF NOISE ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HAD NOT BEEN COMPENSATED ON THE NSAWAM TO SUHUM STRETCH OF THE ACCRA-KUMASI ROAD. THEIR LANDS WERE TAKEN AND THEIR BUILDINGS WERE KNOCKED DOWN IN 2008 DURING THE KUFFOUR, OSAFO MARFO and NANA AKUFO ADDO REIGN. WHY WERE THE PEOPLE NOT COMPENSATED? DID THE GOVERNMENT AT THE TIME DECEIVE THOSE PEOPLE? DID THEY NOT TALK COMPENSATION? NO FIGURES PROMISED? IF YOU CANNOT LOOK AFTER PEOPLE FROM YOUR OWN AREA, WHY TRY TO PROMISE US YOU HAVE OUR INTEREST AT HEART? FREE EDUCATION: TELL US WHAT STATE EDUCATION HAS BEEN LIKE IN THE AREA IN THE LAST 15 YEARS. I WILL SOON GIVE YOU SCHOOLS (AND TOWNS)WHICH FOR MORE THAN 8 YEARS HAD NO KIDS PASSING THE BECE IN THE AKIM AREA. WHERE WILL THEY GET POLLING AGENTS WHO CAN FILL FORMS?
Zegbete 10 years ago

He can sue if he is not happy about any publication. In my opinion, freedom of speech or press is not equivalent to freedom of defamation.

He can sue if he is not happy about any publication. In my opinion, freedom of speech or press is not equivalent to freedom of defamation.
BOY KOFI 10 years ago

I think freedom of speech,expression and association is a fundamental human right Under the United Nation's Geneva Convention.We as people must be responsible for our actions and inactions.I respect Nana Addo very much for hi ...
read full comment

I think freedom of speech,expression and association is a fundamental human right Under the United Nation's Geneva Convention.We as people must be responsible for our actions and inactions.I respect Nana Addo very much for his contribution and struggle against dictatorship.I also do not like his inaction to be a good politician,his political judgement is problematic for that very reason he lost 2008 and 2012 élections.I am sure he will lose the 2013 petition as well if he does not withdraw.I have every reason to respect Nana Addo at least he was present at my sister's funeral at Elmina before the Dec.2012 élections and we received him with the highest respect he deserved.I am one of the guys on Ghanaweb who often disagree with Nana Addo as I have said earlier because I think some of his political stratégies are not effective and needed some reorientation.I think he feels he knows everything perfectly and that's his weakness in political terrain.For example,when he was told not to pick Bawumia for 2012 he did not listen.When he was told to form alliance with the smaller parties against Prez Mahama,he did not pay heed.When he was told that the Free SHS solo campaign is not effective,he did not care either.Then as the petition goes on,we are still telling him to withdraw but he will not listen as usual.This character exposes him to be a self seeking figure,a very bad ingredient in political adventure.This is my humble personal opinion on Nana Addo.Thank you.
seidu 10 years ago

Let them rot in jail.insulting political leaders is nothing new insulting judges of the supreme court is unacceptable.

Let them rot in jail.insulting political leaders is nothing new insulting judges of the supreme court is unacceptable.
NAA4U 10 years ago

TODAY, YOU ARE ASKING IF AKUFFO ADDO IS A VICTIM OF FREE SPEECH, WHAT DIDNT YOU DO TO RAWLINGS, ATTAH MILLS ETC. WHAT ARE YOU NOT DOING TO JOHN MAHAMA?

MY BROTHER, WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS ALSO GOOD FOR THE GANDER.

TODAY, YOU ARE ASKING IF AKUFFO ADDO IS A VICTIM OF FREE SPEECH, WHAT DIDNT YOU DO TO RAWLINGS, ATTAH MILLS ETC. WHAT ARE YOU NOT DOING TO JOHN MAHAMA?

MY BROTHER, WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS ALSO GOOD FOR THE GANDER.
YB 10 years ago

You in the NDC have the penchant for amnesia especially when it suits you. Was it not the NDC that called for politics of character when the NPP was calling for issues-based politics? It is common knowledge that Mills endorse ...
read full comment

You in the NDC have the penchant for amnesia especially when it suits you. Was it not the NDC that called for politics of character when the NPP was calling for issues-based politics? It is common knowledge that Mills endorsed politics of insults. As for Rawlings, the least said about him the better.
Paul Amuna 10 years ago

I have consistently condemned the name-calling, insults, innuendo, tribal bigotry and what have you, often used to describe various personalities including Nana Akufo-Addo who (in my view) has had his own 'unfair' share of su ...
read full comment

I have consistently condemned the name-calling, insults, innuendo, tribal bigotry and what have you, often used to describe various personalities including Nana Akufo-Addo who (in my view) has had his own 'unfair' share of such insults.

I look forward to the day when such 'cheap insults' and tribal bigotry and name-calling against people who may not have a right of reply will be come explicitly punishable by law. I tend to believe that if we had such laws as now pertain e.g. in the UK against racial and religious hatred, Ghana would be on the right road to doing away with the tribal, religious and partisan nonsense that allows people to get 'away with murder'.

Honestly, I feel Akufo-Addo has not been treated fairly by many fools who continue to think that it is OK to insult him the way they do especially in the social media.
CONCERNED GHANAIAN 10 years ago

Kwaku Azar is the most confused man I evr know.I wishe he could have the courage to define what a free speech is all about and if it has a limitation or not.Please give us a break! Who cares what the Whites said about Obama? ...
read full comment

Kwaku Azar is the most confused man I evr know.I wishe he could have the courage to define what a free speech is all about and if it has a limitation or not.Please give us a break! Who cares what the Whites said about Obama? We are Ghanaians and an independent nation for that much,and have the right to do what we deem fit for the benefit of our society. Where in the world are such reckless comments made on a serious case such as this? If it goes against certain gropu of people, it is normaal but when it goes against these Ashanti/ Akyems, it is bias! Ghana is for all Ghanaians irrespective of one´s geographical location.Elections are won through the ballot box and not through the chambers of a court.Where is the one-touch that we´ve headr all along? Shameful bigots!

Is Akufo-Addo a Victim of Free Speech?

Read Comments .st0{display:none;fill:#14BDD3;} .st1{display:none;} .st2{display:inline;fill:#FC0F0F;} .st3{display:inline;fill:#FFFFFF;} .st4{display:inline;fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:6;stroke-miterlimit:10;} Comments (68)

Read Comments Comments (68)