Larry Dogbey
The Editor of The Herald newspaper, Larry Dogbey, has been sentenced to seven days’ imprisonment for contempt of court.
He was convicted by a High Court in Accra presided over by Justice Isaac Addo, which found him to be in contempt following some publications relating to businessman Kevin Okyere and multinational firm, Petraco SA, in spite of an existing injunction against him.
Larry Dogbey, who confirmed his conviction and sentencing on Facebook, said The Herald newspaper reported only on a petition filed by the multinational company with the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), Ghana Investment Promotion Centre (GIPC) and the Attorney General.
“Ghana Deserves better… Journalism is not a crime…” he added.
Okyere had secured an injunction against the journalist, barring him from publishing any articles concerning him that are intended to undermine, or tarnish his reputation within the society and the Petroleum Industry and as a businessman, pending the determination of a substantive suit involving the businessman and the newspaper.
The application for contempt, sighted by DAILY GUIDE, noted that despite having knowledge of the order of the court, Larry Dogbey, in complete disregard of and clearly disrespecting the order of the court, proceeded to make “false publications” of Okyere.
The application lists multiple stories about Okyere, which he contended were disrespectful to the court and constituted contempt of court.
“The Respondent (Larry Dogbey) having notice of the injunction application and the grant of same ought not to make any publication of and concerning me with the intended purpose of tarnishing my reputation pending the determination of the suit.”
Okyere had contended that despite being aware of the existing injunction, Larry Dogbey proceeded to make publications concerning him “in wanton disregard of the order(s) of the Court.”
He further noted that Larry Dogbey’s actions were clearly a calculated attempt to undermine and disrespect the authority of the court as well as bring the court to disrepute by showing to the entire world that “the order(s) of the Court may be disregarded, especially when the party is aware of the order, having participated in the proceedings, and by so doing in sending a message publicly that the Respondent herein is not subject to the processes of the Court and has no regard to judicial processes.”
Again, the applicant contended that the processes and proceedings of the courts must be respected irrespective of the views taken by a party of such processes and proceedings.
“The reason being that the authority of the courts would wane or be undermined if parties show little or no respect for processes and proceedings emanating from the court,” he contended.
He further pointed out that “the court owes it as an obligation to itself and to the parties who look up to it for justice to unequivocally communicate to parties before it in the manner prayed for that the Court’s, their orders and processes must be taken seriously and duly respected and complied with.”
“The failure by the Court to act clearly and decisively on Respondent’s conduct will embolden not just Respondent to continue on his course of lawless conduct, but also others like him, who think that it is only decisions and processes of Court favourable to them which are worthy of attention, recognition and submission to the Court,” Okyere added.
A Daily Guide Report