Legal practitioner and activist Oliver Barker-Vormawor has indicated he will move to overturn a High Court ruling that ordered him to pay GH₵5.1 million in damages to former National Security Minister Albert Kan Dapaah, describing the proceedings as fundamentally flawed.

Reacting to the March 2 judgment in a Facebook post, Barker-Vormawor alleged that the court process was marred by procedural irregularities.

He claimed his legal team was unable to complete cross-examination of Mr Kan Dapaah and that his own witness statement, though properly filed, was not considered before the court delivered its decision.

“Of course we will seek to set it aside. But he can take his victory lap,” he wrote.

Background to the ruling


On Monday, the High Court in Accra awarded GH₵5 million in general damages against Barker-Vormawor in favour of Mr Kan Dapaah in a defamation suit. The court further imposed GH₵100,000 in costs.

Presiding judge Justice (Rev.) Joseph Owusu Adu-Agyeman granted most of the reliefs sought by the former minister but reduced the initial GH₵10 million compensation claim by half.

The suit stemmed from allegations made by Barker-Vormawor that Mr Kan Dapaah and other government officials had offered him money to halt his activism. The former minister denied the claims and pursued legal action, arguing that the statements were defamatory.

Ahead of the ruling, Barker-Vormawor’s lawyers applied to have their Statement of Defence and Witness Statement — previously struck out — restored to the record. The court dismissed the application, ruling that it did not comply with procedural requirements. Consequently, there was no valid defence before the court at the time judgment was delivered.

In his account, Barker-Vormawor said that after his initial lawyer was appointed Deputy Attorney General, he obtained an adjournment to engage new counsel. However, he claimed that when his new lawyer sought time to study the case and file necessary documents, the court declined the request and directed that cross-examination proceed.

He further alleged that after his counsel missed a court date, the judge struck out his defence and scheduled the matter for judgment.

“We filed a motion to relist the defense and filed my witness statement and that of my other witness. We also filed a motion to arrest judgment. Judge refused it. Went ahead to give Kan Dapaah judgment,” he stated.

Barker-Vormawor has since invited the public to review his witness statement, insisting that it contains material the court did not take into account.

The development sets the stage for what could become the next phase of the legal battle, as the activist signals his intention to challenge the High Court’s decision.