Dompim ‘Chief’, Multimedia Hot Over Defamation Suit

…As Court Grants W/R Minister 1million Default Judgment after Galamsey Story

An Accra High Court, has granted a one million Ghana Cedis (GH₵1,000, 000) default judgement against Nathaniel Dekyi, a self-styled chief of Dompim Pepesa in the Western region and Multimedia Group for defamation.

The High Court, (General Jurisdiction 11), presided over by His Lordship, Richard Apietu, in its ruling on February 19, 2024, granted the Plaintiff’s Application to recover a sum of GH₵1,000, 000.00, from the defendants as general damages.

This, follows a suit filed by the Western Regional Minister, Kwabena Okyere Darko-Mensah, as the plaintiff against Nathaniel Dekyi, who also goes by a stool name Nana Nyowah Panyin IV and the Multimedia Group Limited as 1st and 2nd defendants, respectively.

The writ, filed on October 14, 2022, came after the said self-styled chief, alleged that the Regional Minister was involved in illegal mining, otherwise known as galamsey, a claimed which was published on, a subsidiary of the Multimedia Group.

Entry of Judgment

Parkwood & Mossane, who are Lawyers for the plaintiff, have since initiated processes to carry out the court’s order to recover the amount.

Documents from the court, sighted by The Anchor titled ‘Notice of Entry of Judgement’ said, “THIS ACTION having come before the High Court (General Jurisdiction 11), presided over by HIS LORDSHIP RICHARD APIETU on 19th February 2024, and the Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment having been granted by the Court”.

Dated 27th February 2024 and filed on March 1, 2024, the document in Suit NO: GJ/0011/2023 said, “IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that Plaintiff recovers from the Defendants the following:

  1. General Damages of One Million Ghana Cedis (GH₵1,000, 000) against the Defendants for defamation”.

The document, signed by the Solicitor for Plaintiff, Kofi Owusu Boateng, ESQ is to be served defendants/judgement debtors.


It would be recalled that, the self-acclaimed chief, Nana Nyowah Panyin IV of Dompim Pepesa, during an interview with Joy FM, alleged that some government officials, including the Western Regional Minister, were hindering his efforts as the chief to stop the galamsey menace in the Dompim Pepesa area of the region.

“I know not of any company but I know of the very people who are behind the operations of galamsey in my area. First and foremost, the Regional Minister, Kwabena Okyere Darko-Mensah, is involved,” the self-styled chief was reported to have said.

He claimed that, he has incontrovertible evidence of the involvement of the Regional Minister and the others in illegal mining in the area.

But the minister, in a letter addressed to the media house, argued that the allegations made against him in the story were false, baseless and aimed at courting public disaffection for his hard-earned reputation.

Through his solicitors, the minister demanded the retraction of the story and a written apology by Multimedia within 24 hours or face the legal consequences of their action.

However, failure by the media house to retract the story and apologize as demanded, forced the regional minister to initiate legal action against the company, the Multimedia Group.


This was after the Dompim Pepesa Divisional Council, in a statement on same day, also disassociated itself from Nathaniel Dekyi, stating that he is not the Chief of Dompim Pepesa.

“We entreat the media and the general public to disregard any interview by him as he is not and has never been the Chief of Dompim Pepesa,” the statement said.

Statement of Claim

In a Statement of Claim, the plaintiff stated that on October 10, 2022, the 1st defendant granted an interview on the Joy FM Super Morning show owned and operated by the 2nd defendant.

“In the interview, the first defendant made spurious allegations against the person of the plaintiff that the plaintiff together with two other government officials, is involved in galamsey in the Dompim Pepesa area.”

The plaintiff averred that the wild allegations by the first defendant and published by the second defendant were absolute false, baseless and unwarranted.

The plaintiff indicated that the two defendants have refused to retract and apologise for the defamatory statements.

“Unless compelled by the court, the defendants shall persist in the defamation of the plaintiff,” the statement added.


Related Posts