An Accra High Court has issued a permanent injunction against freelance investigative journalist Innocent Samuel Appiah, barring him from publishing or sharing allegations about a private individual, Cynthia Adjei, after ruling that any such publication would violate her constitutional right to privacy.
The Human Rights Division of the court, presided over by Justice Nana Brew, also awarded GH¢10,000 in costs against the journalist. The ruling restrains Mr Appiah from making any investigative publication, commentary, or reference, whether direct or indirect, on the subject matter of the case across both traditional and digital media platforms.
In his judgment, Justice Brew acknowledged that press freedom is protected under the 1992 Constitution, but said it is not absolute. He stressed that journalists must exercise that freedom within the law, particularly where the privacy and reputation of private individuals are at stake.
The court held that journalists are expected to act with due diligence and to rely on established legal and institutional channels when dealing with allegations of wrongdoing. Justice Brew said that where suspected criminal conduct is uncovered, the proper step is to report the matter to state agencies such as the Economic and Organised Crime Office, the Ghana Police Service, the Criminal Investigations Department, or the National Intelligence Bureau, rather than publishing claims that have not been verified.
“From the totality of the evidence available, if the first respondent felt that the information was of public interest, he should not have sought the publication of them,” the court stated. “Rather, he should have reported to EOCO, the Police, CID or the National Intelligence Bureau.”
The judge concluded that publishing the material the journalist intended to investigate would amount to an invasion of Mrs Adjei’s privacy. On the balance of competing constitutional rights, the court held that her right to privacy outweighed any claimed public interest in the matter.
Although the court declined to award damages, it found that the journalist’s actions exposed the applicant to potential reputational harm, making the injunction necessary to prevent further injury.
The case dates back to June 2025, when Justice Brew granted an interlocutory injunction stopping Mr Appiah from publishing a report on alleged unethical practices and possible conflicts of interest involving Lysaro Group, a company associated with Mrs Adjei.
The dispute arose after Mr Appiah sent a detailed questionnaire to Mr and Mrs Adjei, seeking responses to concerns about the company’s land acquisitions, contract awards, and tax compliance. Mrs Adjei did not respond to the questions and instead went to court to block the publication.
At the time, the court said it was necessary to protect the applicant’s fundamental human rights, noting that damages would not be an adequate remedy if publication went ahead, even though no story had been published.
Mrs Adjei told the court that she is a private individual and has never held public office. The journalist, however, argued that her husband’s past roles as Group Chief Finance Officer and Acting Managing Director of GOIL Ghana Plc, as well as his position as board chair of the Students Loan Trust Fund, placed her within the category of a politically exposed person. He said those connections justified public interest scrutiny, particularly because the institutions were alleged to have awarded contracts to Lysaro Group.
It emerged during proceedings that Mr Appiah had not published any article on the matter and had only sent private messages and letters as part of what he described as routine pre publication verification.
The ruling has since stirred debate in media and legal circles. Press freedom advocates warn it could discourage investigative journalism, while others say it reinforces the need for responsible reporting that respects the rights of private citizens.
The case adds to the ongoing national debate over where the line should be drawn between press freedom, privacy, and the courts’ role in balancing public interest journalism with personal reputation.
