Months after the premiering of Tiger Eye PI’s number12 documentary, Ghana Federation Association member Saani Daara who was contradicted in the documentary has sued Anas Amereyaw Anas and the Attorney General for breach of privacy
Lawyers for Mr Daara have pleaded with the Court to allow them cross examine the lawyers for the Respondents who swore to the witness statement.
Read full statement below
Saani Daara V Anas Aremeyaw Anas, Tiger Eye PI and AG
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.
