Lawyers for Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin have vowed to pursue his GH¢15 million defamation suit against Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) Chief Executive Officer Sammy Gyamfi, despite an Accra uHigh Court ruling setting aside the case on procedural grounds.
In a statement issued by Dehyena Chambers on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, the legal team said it had received instructions from its client to pursue the matter “to its logical conclusion”.
The lawyers indicated that they were awaiting the full judgment before determining their next legal steps. They added that, as of 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, the court registry had not made a copy of the judgment available to them. Source: MyJoyOnline.
Why the High Court set aside the caseThe High Court, presided over by Justice Akwasi Adjenim Boateng, set aside the writ of summons and statement of claim after finding that the writ did not provide sufficient particulars of the publication alleged to be defamatory.
The court held that the action failed to meet the requirements of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47), which prescribe specific procedural requirements for defamation proceedings.
The decision means that the case, as commenced under the defective writ, could not proceed in its existing form. The ruling did not determine whether the statements attributed to Mr Gyamfi were defamatory.
The distinction is important: the court addressed the legal adequacy of the documents used to commence the action, rather than deciding the underlying allegations. Read the court ruling report from Graphic Online.
Afenyo-Markin’s lawyers raise concerns over service of court documentsIn their statement, Mr Afenyo-Markin’s lawyers also questioned the handling of the court documents by Mr Gyamfi’s legal representatives, Ayine & Partners.
According to Dehyena Chambers, Ayine & Partners wrote to the court on August 26, 2026, indicating that they were authorised to accept service of the writ on behalf of their client.
The lawyers further alleged that the documents were subsequently returned to the court registry after the legal representatives indicated that their client had changed his mind. They also said a later attempt to serve the documents personally on Mr Gyamfi at his office was unsuccessful.
Mr Afenyo-Markin’s legal team argued that the applicable court rules recognise written undertakings by lawyers to accept service on behalf of their clients.
These assertions represent the position of Mr Afenyo-Markin’s lawyers. They should not be interpreted as separate findings made by the court in its ruling on the defective writ.
Lawyers criticise reliance on procedural objection
The legal team also criticised what it described as an emphasis on procedural issues rather than a defence to the substantive allegations.
The lawyers maintained that procedural irregularities should not prevent the underlying dispute from being pursued and said they would consider the full judgment before deciding how to proceed. However, the High Court’s decision turned on compliance with the rules governing defamation actions. Any further legal action will depend on the steps the legal team decides to take and the applicable law.
How the GH¢15 million defamation dispute began. The lawsuit arose from comments allegedly made by Mr Gyamfi about Mr Afenyo-Markin during an edition of JoyNews’ Newsfile programme in August 2026.
The central issue underlying the claim—whether the contested remarks legally amounted to defamation—was not determined by the High Court’s procedural ruling. What happens next? The immediate next step, according to Mr Afenyo-Markin’s lawyers, is to review the full judgment before determining their course of action. Their commitment to pursue the matter signals that the legal dispute may continue, although the precise form and timing of any further proceedings have not been established.For now, the High Court has set aside the writ and statement of claim. Whether the legal team will pursue another available legal route remains to be seen.
