By GhanaNewsPage 
A defamation case that has attracted intense public interest both in Ghana and internationally reached a surprising turn in May 2025, as a U.S. court drastically reduced damages awarded to renowned Ghanaian investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas.
Originally, the jury had awarded Anas $18 million in his suit against former Ghanaian legislator Kennedy Agyapong. However, following a judicial review, the final damages were reduced to just $500.
This decision raises questions about why such a large award was overturned, and what it means for both justice and reputation in high-profile defamation cases.
The legal dispute stems from public comments made by Kennedy Agyapong, who accused Anas of unethical journalism practices, criminal behavior, and even linked him to the murder of his investigative partner, Ahmed Suale. These allegations, broadcast across various platforms, were described by Anas as false, malicious, and damaging to his reputation and professional integrity.
Anas, who is known for his undercover work exposing corruption across Africa, sued Agyapong in a U.S. court in 2018 for defamation and reputational harm. After years of legal proceedings, a jury ruled in Anas’ favor in 2023, initially awarding him $18 million in damages.
Despite the jury’s original decision, the court later reviewed a request from Kennedy Agyapong’s legal team known as a motion for remittitur. This legal move argued that the jury’s award was “excessive and disproportionate” to the alleged damage caused by Agyapong’s comments.
The judge agreed that while Agyapong’s statements were defamatory, the monetary award lacked sufficient justification and could not stand as is. As a result, the damages were slashed to just $500—a symbolic amount that confirms wrongdoing but does not impose a heavy financial burden.
Also Read: Namibia’s Lawmakers Inspired by Ibrahim Traoré’s Revolutionary Path in Burkina Faso
In a statement following the court’s ruling, Anas emphasized that his main goal in pursuing the lawsuit was to seek justice, not to profit financially. He noted that the court’s acknowledgment of defamation was more important than the monetary compensation.
“This was never about millions. It was about the truth, my reputation, and the principles of journalism,” Anas remarked. He also reiterated his commitment to investigative journalism and to fighting corruption, despite the smear campaign launched against him.
The outcome of the case illustrates the complexity of defamation law, especially in international contexts where freedom of expression and journalistic responsibility intersect. While some may view the reduced award as a loss for Anas, legal experts argue that the court’s confirmation of defamation validates Anas’ claims and preserves his integrity.
Moreover, the case sends a signal that public figures can be held accountable for their words—even across borders—though courts may also moderate jury awards to ensure fairness and proportionality.
The $500 awarded to Anas may not reflect the emotional or professional toll caused by the accusations, but the court’s ruling affirms a key point: Kennedy Agyapong defamed a journalist whose work has had far-reaching impact. For Anas, the real victory lies not in a large payout but in clearing his name and reaffirming the value of truth in journalism.
As Ghana and the world continue to monitor developments in freedom of the press and public accountability, this case stands as a landmark in defending reputational justice, especially in the digital age where false claims can spread rapidly and widely.
#Defamation #Kennedy Agyapong #Anas
