Lawyer David Annan, counsel for Larry Alan Dogbey, Editor of The Herald newspaper, has challenged the legal basis of the High Court’s decision to jail his client for contempt, insisting the defence will pursue all available legal avenues to overturn the ruling.
Speaking on Radio Gold’s Gold Morning Conversation, Annan said he and his client were taken aback by the court’s decision, arguing that the defence had presented what he described as strong legal authorities and arguments that should have led to a different outcome.
The contempt conviction stems from an interlocutory injunction obtained in a defamation suit brought by Springfield Exploration and Production Limited, which restrained The Herald from publishing material alleged to be defamatory toward the company. Larry Dogbey was subsequently sentenced to seven days’ imprisonment after the court found that the injunction had been breached.
Providing the background to the dispute, Annan explained that The Herald’s publications centred on the long-running disagreement between Springfield and Italian energy company ENI over the proposed unitisation of the Afina and Sankofa oil fields.
He noted that the newspaper had reported on the controversy, including the previous government’s directive supporting the unitisation and the subsequent decision by the current administration to terminate it.
Annan argued that the injunction effectively sought to restrain constitutionally protected freedom of expression, maintaining that an allegation of defamation must first be established before contempt could arise from subsequent publications.
He also questioned the manner in which court processes were served on his client, raising concerns about substituted service through WhatsApp and describing aspects of the service as incomplete and procedurally defective.
While declining to comment extensively on the judge’s reasoning because the matter remains before the courts, Annan maintained that the defence believes significant legal issues remain unresolved and will continue to challenge the decision through the judicial process.
“We were rather taken aback,” he said, adding that: “We believe the legal authorities we presented were compelling, but the court took a different view.”
The lawyer further disclosed that efforts are underway to seek appropriate legal remedies aimed at overturning the contempt ruling and securing Dogbey’s release.
The case has reignited public debate over the delicate balance between protecting the authority of the courts and safeguarding media freedom, particularly in matters involving reporting on issues of significant public interest.
