Lawyers for Alexander Afenyo-Markin have vowed to pursue his defamation case against Sammy Gyamfi despite a High Court decision setting aside the writ filed by the NPP Minority Leader over alleged procedural defects.
In a statement dated Wednesday, October 14, 2026, Afenyo-Markin’s lawyers at Dehyena Chambers said the High Court, General Jurisdiction 1, presided over by Justice Agyenim Boateng, set aside the writ because of the “non-particularisation of the alleged defamatory words used by Mr. Sammy Gyamfi.”
The suit, filed on August 24, 2026, sought GH¢15 million in damages and an order compelling Gyamfi to issue a full retraction and apology.
The court upheld a preliminary objection by Mr. Gyamfi’s lawyers, who argued that the writ failed to meet the requirements for defamation actions under Order 57 Rule 2 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, C.I. 47.
Reacting to the ruling, Dehyena Chambers said its client remained determined to pursue the matter.
“We have the full instructions of Osahen Alexander Kwamena Afenyo-Markin to pursue this matter to its logical conclusion,” the statement said.
The lawyers disclosed that, as of 4:00 p.m. on October 14, the court registry had not made a copy of the ruling available to them.
“We therefore await with bated breath for the ruling of the Court to determine the next cause of action as instructed,” the statement added.
The firm also criticised Mr. Gyamfi’s approach to the proceedings, arguing that he had previously made allegations against Afenyo-Markin and publicly claimed to have evidence to support them.
It said, “We find it curiously troubling that Mr. Sammy Gyamfi, who made categorical allegations against Osahen Alexander Kwamena Afenyo-Markin, and publicly claimed to have evidence to substantiate them, and further challenged Osahen to sue, has chosen the path of procedural roadblocks rather than file a defence.”
The lawyers maintained that procedural defects should not prevent the substantive issues in a case from being addressed, citing the principle that “Justice should not be sacrificed on the altar of technicalities.”
They concluded, “We will not be deterred by procedural setbacks. The Mills of Justice grind slowly, but with great surety.”
