The application by Rev. Victor Kusi Boateng, also known as Kwabena Adu Gyamfi, to stop Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, the member of parliament for North Tongu, from writing any more articles about him, was denied by the Human Rights Court.
The application was denied for lack of capacity and locus standi because the court’s ruling was unequivocal that Ablakwa’s oversight had revealed two distinct identities in conduct that was almost criminal.
The judge fined Rev. Victor Kusi Boateng, also known as Kwabena Adu Gyamfi, GHC 10,000 in costs. This is the second time that Kusi Boateng has had costs assessed against him.
Kusi Boateng, the applicant, came before the court to ask that respondent Ablakwa stop criticizing him in publications.
Ablakwa has made accusations of conflict of interest and double dipping against Kusi Boateng, who also serves as Secretary to the Board of Trustees of the National Cathedral.
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023, Rev. Kusi Boateng filed an order of injunction against the MP prohibiting him from publishing any more information about him.
In its decision on July 13, 2023, the court stated that the applicant’s (Kusi Boateng) claim that using two names in the manner he has done is not against the law is mistaken because the two identities were used in a pattern of duplicity that demonstrated a lack of transparency and this conduct almost certainly violated the law.
Summary of Judgment
It has been established that the applicant used both Kwabena Adu Gyamfi and Victor Kusi Boateng simultaneously under different names. The first respondent is therefore justified in asserting that Victor Kusi Boateng is not an alias but rather a completely different identity.
The use of the two identities does not appear to be a straightforward case of using two different names, but rather the use of two independent and wholly separate identities to conceal the applicant’s dealings in a way that was not apparent until the investigations and publications of the 1st Respondent.
According to Article 33(1) of the 1992 Constitution, in order to have locus standi, an applicant must have a personal interest in the subject matter.
Which of the two distinct identities is attempting to enforce its fundamental human rights through this lawsuit is unclear based on the court documents. And this Application is dismissed for lack of capacity and locus standi once a clear case of double identit is presented to this court and proven.
costs of GHC 10,000 awarded in favor of the first respondent against the applicant.
