Truth on Trial: Anas Wins Defamation Case Against Kennedy Agyapong—But Walks Away With Just $500

In a legal battle that gripped Ghana's public imagination and reverberated through international press freedom circles, investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas has secured a symbolic but significant victory in a defamation case against outspoken politician Kennedy Agyapong. The lawsuit, filed in a New Jersey court, stemmed from explosive comments made by Agyapong during a 2021 podcast, in which he accused Anas of being complicit in criminal activity and suggested a connection to the 2019 murder of journalist Ahmed Hussein-Suale.

In March 2025, a jury in the Essex County Superior Court found Agyapong liable for defamation and initially awarded Anas $18 million in damages, including $8 million in punitive compensation. The verdict was seen by many as a bold affirmation of the role investigative journalists play in holding the powerful accountable. It also appeared to deliver a harsh rebuke to Agyapong's sustained attacks on Anas, who is known for his undercover exposés on corruption in Ghana and beyond.

However, the dramatic legal win was short-lived—at least in monetary terms. In May 2025, the presiding judge reviewed the jury's decision and granted a motion for remittitur, reducing the damages to just $500. While maintaining the finding of defamation, the judge ruled that the original amount was excessive and could not be upheld.

Anas, however, remained unfazed. In a public statement, he described the outcome not as a financial loss but a moral and professional vindication. "This fight has not been about the money, but rather, a fight for truth and justice," he said. For the award-winning journalist, the ruling is less about the figure on a cheque and more about the global message it sends: that no one—regardless of power or position—can falsely smear a journalist without consequence.

The case, and its outcome, highlights the precarious position of journalists who dare to challenge power in volatile environments. It also affirms the legal system's capacity—however delayed or diluted—to correct false narratives and restore reputations.

In the end, Anas may have walked away with just $500, but in the court of global public opinion, he leaves with something far greater: justice, vindication, and a renewed call to defend the truth at all costs.