By: Alexander Afriyie
In a dramatic turn of events, a New Jersey court has significantly reduced an $18 million defamation award against Hon. Ken Ohene Agyapong to a mere $500. The case, brought by Ghanaian investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas, claimed that Mr. Agyapong had defamed him.
The court’s decision to slash the award was based on the lack of concrete evidence supporting the plaintiff’s claims of substantial harm. According to New Jersey law, defamation requires proof of false statements, communication to a third party, fault amounting to at least negligence, and harm suffered by the plaintiff.
The jury initially awarded Anas $18 million, but Judge Beacham intervened, citing the excessive nature of the award and the lack of evidence to support it. The court applied the legal tool of remittitur, reducing the award to $500, the maximum nominal award justified by law.
This case highlights the importance of evidence-based claims and the role of the judiciary in ensuring that awards are reasonable and supported by law. The court’s decision demonstrates that even with a jury’s verdict, the legal process can correct excessive awards and uphold the principles of justice.