Court never ordered Anas to appear in court — Tiger Eye PI

Tiger Eye PI has debunked reports that, court has ordered multiple award wining undercover journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas to personally appear in court.

It has earlier emerged that a judge has ruled that he [Anas Aremeyaw Anas] and his Tiger Eye PI must defend themselves in court over the human rights case brought against them by Ibrahim Sannie Daara after they sought to dodge the case by asking a lawyer to answer to the lawsuit on their behalf.

In a statements to refute the reports, the private investigative organisation explained that, the court had taken judicial notice of the fact that a member of Tiger Eye PI Ahmed Hussein Suale has been killed and that by the nature of Human rights Court procedure, this case will be fought primarily on Affidavit.

The statement  further explained that, because the case will be fought on Affidavit, there will be no need for any operative of the Respondent to appear in person to be cross-examined.

It however stated that the report is "outright peddling of falsehood" and therefore must be disregarded.

Read the full statement below:

Saani Daara V Anas Aremeyaw Anas, Tiger Eye Pi and AG

(HUMAN RIGHTS COURT 2: Justice Nicholas Abodakpi)

Saanie Daara has sued Tiger Eye, Anas and Attorney General for breach of privacy in relation to the Number12 documentary. The Respondents have responded to the suit and accordingly filed their witness statement opposing the relics being sought by Sannie.

Saani Daara prayed the Court to dismiss the witness statement tendered on be-half of the Respondents (Anas and Tiger Eye PI) by their lawyers as hearsay.

Lawyers for Mr Daara also pleaded with the Court to allow his lawyers to cross examine the lawyer for the Respondents who swore to the witness statement.

And finally asked the Court that if it strikes out the witness statement, it should go ahead and hear the case without any evidence from the Respondents.

The argument by lawyers for the Respondents were that due to the nature of death threats on the lives of the Respondents (1st and 2nd), it was imperative that their lawyers are allowed to stand in their stead. They go on further to argue that the information that the Respondents would tender in court is what they have told their lawyers.

The Court was of the opinion that although the lives of the respondents were at risk, it was not a good enough excuse to come under the exceptions allowed by CI 47 for a lawyer to stand in the stead of their clients treating the client as unavailable witness.

The Court said it had taken judicial notice of the fact that a member of Tiger Eye PI has been killed and that by the nature of Human rights Court procedure, this case will be fought primarily on Affidavit.

The judge went on to say because it will be fought on Affidavit, there will be no need for any operative of the Respondent to appear in person to be cross ex-amined. And since they will not be in Court, they must at least visit their lawyers and write their witness statements to be tendered in Court.

They have since done that. An associate of Tiger Eye will simply swear to same affidavit to be tendered in court this week. Anas will not be in Court neither will he make any personal statement in Court.

The Court never ordered Anas to appear in Court to defend himself. That is outright peddling of falsehood.

Tiger Eye PI