US Court Slashes Defamation Payout to Ghanaian Journalist ‘Anas’ from $18M to $500

A U.S. court has significantly reduced a defamation award granted to renowned Ghanaian investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas, cutting the payout from $18 million to just $500.

The original award was issued in March 2024 by a jury that found former Ghanaian Member of Parliament Kennedy Agyapong guilty of defaming Anas. Agyapong had publicly called Anas a “criminal” and falsely linked him to the 2019 murder of fellow investigative journalist Ahmed Suale. The defamatory remarks were made during a podcast recorded in the United States.

However, in a recent ruling, a New Jersey judge described the $18 million sum as “excessive and legally unsustainable,” siding with an appeal by Agyapong’s legal team. The judge ultimately reduced the damages to a symbolic $500, despite the jury’s original decision in Anas’ favor.

Anas has since stated his intention to appeal the reduction. His investigative outfit, Tiger Eye P.I., emphasized that the lawsuit was never about financial gain but about protecting his reputation and the integrity of investigative journalism.

Before approaching the U.S. courts, Anas had filed a similar defamation suit in Ghana. That case was dismissed, with the presiding judge controversially describing Anas’ undercover reporting style as “investigative terrorism.”

The U.S. case proceeded independently due to the fact that Agyapong made the defamatory remarks while in the U.S. and owns property in the country  establishing jurisdiction for the American court.

Anas, widely recognized for his undercover work and trademark face mask to protect his identity, has led numerous high-profile investigations into corruption across Africa. After the initial jury verdict in March, he hailed the outcome as a form of justice and a sign of encouragement to fellow journalists across the continent.

In contrast, Kennedy Agyapong, who is known for his fiery rhetoric, responded to the case by stating he remains committed to promoting “truth and accountability in public life.”

The case continues to generate public debate in both Ghana and abroad, especially concerning press freedom, journalistic methods, and the boundaries of political speech.