The Head Pastor of the Tabernacle of David Assemblies of God Church, Prophet Akwasi Boateng, has been dragged to Court to be committed to prison for contempt of court.
This follows a motion on notice for attachment for contempt filed by Plaintiff Yaa Achiama Watts – who is Administratrix and the Beneficiary of the estate of her late mother, through her lawful attorney, Adom Amoah.
The plaintiff who added that she is businesswoman is invoking Order 50 Rules 1(1), (2) & (3) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, C.I. 47.
She is seeking “an order for attachment of Prophet Akwasi Boateng, the defendants/respondents and committal to prison for contempt of Court” upon grounds of deliberate attempt to put administration of Justice into disrepute.
Statement of case
At the heart of the dispute is a parcel of land currently the subject of litigation before the High Court. The plaintiff alleges that the church, led by Prophet Boateng, has been undertaking construction works on the land despite a pending application for an interlocutory injunction.
According to court documents, on March 11, 2026, the plaintiff caused her lawyers to file a repeated motion on notice for an order for interlocutory injunction.
The motion sought to restrain the defendants, their agents, assigns and privies from developing the disputed land while the substantive matter is pending.
Court records indicate that the amended writ of summons, statement of claim, and the repeated motion on notice were duly served on all defendants by a court bailiff attached to the registry of the High Court.
In response, the 2nd defendant/respondent, through its lawyers, filed an affidavit in opposition on 19th March 2026. Prophet Akwasi Boateng personally deposed to and signed the affidavit, describing himself as the Head Pastor, Trustee, and lawful representative of the 2nd defendant/respondent.
Counsel for the plaintiff moved the application for interlocutory injunction on 15th April 2026. After hearing both sides, the Court adjourned the matter to May 28, 2026 for ruling.
The plaintiff avers that even before the injunction application, the 2nd defendant/respondent, led by Prophet Boateng, had commenced construction on the disputed land up to the first floor.
The contempt allegation stems from events that allegedly occurred after the injunction motion was filed and while the court’s ruling was still pending.
The plaintiff’s attorney states that on May 7, 2026, she visited the disputed land and observed that agents, servants and workmen of the 2nd defendant, led by Prophet Boateng, had resumed active construction.
Upon making this discovery, the plaintiff’s lawyers immediately notified lawyers for the 2nd defendant. They requested that Prophet Boateng be advised to desist from any further construction pending the court’s ruling.
Attempt to disrupt administration of justice
Despite this notification and warning, the plaintiff claims the Head Pastor failed and or refused to halt the ongoing works. She argues this amounts to an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice.
On May 15, 2026, the plaintiff’s attorney again visited the land. She alleges that workmen and representatives of the 2nd defendant, led by the Head Pastor, were still actively carrying out construction.
A second notification was sent to the defendant’s lawyers, again warning Prophet Boateng to stop all activities on the land pending the ruling of the court.
The plaintiff contends that notwithstanding the pendency of the application, construction has continued, materially altering the condition and character of the disputed land. A pen drive and photographs marked Exhibit “EA3” have been filed to evidence the current level of development.
According to the affidavit, Prophet Boateng had full knowledge of the pending injunction application and the fact that the court had reserved its ruling. The plaintiff alleges he deliberately resumed construction “without any respect for the Judicial Authority because he believes he is a Pastor.”
Counsel for the plaintiff led by Samuel Atuah argues that the actions of Prophet Boateng are deliberate and wilful and contended that his continuous construction has brought the administration of justice into disrepute.
The motion cites the principle in Oswald on Contempt, which states that contempt may be constituted by any conduct that tends to bring the authority and administration of the law into disrepute or to interfere with or prejudice parties during litigation.
The plaintiff submits that any conduct that disregards the authority of the court is an offence not only against the courts but against the entire community which the courts serve.
She adds that the Head Pastor has demonstrated “utter disdain and disregard” for the powers of the court.
The applicant further argues that if court processes can be “deliberately set to naught and fragrantly ignored” without consequence, “injustice vanishes over the horizon, and the Law is brought into disrepute.”
It is the plaintiff’s case that the conduct of Prophet Boateng was not accidental or mistaken, but deliberate and calculated. She says construction continued even after his lawyers were notified and asked to advise him to desist.
According to the plaintiff, the purpose of the continued works is to overreach the court and present it with a fait accompli before the delivery of its ruling on 28th May 2026.
The plaintiff concludes that it has become necessary for the court to punish the conduct in order to uphold the dignity, authority, and sanctity of the court. She argues that unless committed for contempt, Prophet Boateng is likely to continue and further undermine the authority of the court.
The court is expected to hear and determine the motion on notice for attachment for contempt on July 13, 2026.
Source: Starrfm.com.gh
