BY Grace Zigah
The Private Newspapers and Online News Publishers Association of Ghana (PRINPAG) has strongly condemned a recent ruling by the Human Rights Court 2 in Accra, describing it as a troubling setback for media freedom and accountability in the country.
The ruling, delivered by Justice Nana Brew, granted an interlocutory injunction restraining investigative journalist Innocent Samuel Appiah from publishing findings of an ongoing investigation into alleged corruption involving businesswoman Cynthia Adjei and the Lysaro Group.
In a statement issued on December 29, 2025, PRINPAG said the decision represents a worrying development that could undermine the constitutional role of the media as Ghana’s Fourth Estate.
According to the association, the injunction—granted before any publication was made—amounts to prior restraint, a practice widely viewed as inconsistent with democratic principles and press freedom.
PRINPAG noted that the case raises fundamental concerns about judicial attitudes toward investigative journalism, particularly in matters involving individuals or entities linked to power and influence.
The association argued that preventing journalists from publishing verified findings on matters of public interest weakens transparency and shields potential wrongdoing from public scrutiny.
The group further criticised suggestions emerging from the ruling that journalists should limit their work to cooperating with state investigative bodies such as the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
According to PRINPAG, such a position misunderstands the constitutional mandate of the media, which is to operate independently as a watchdog, not as an appendage of state institutions.
Of particular concern to the association is the implication that individuals engaged in private business but connected to public power structures could be shielded from journalistic inquiry.
PRINPAG warned that such a position, if allowed to stand, would erode public accountability and weaken democratic oversight.
While reaffirming its respect for the judiciary and due process, PRINPAG cautioned that the growing use of court injunctions to suppress investigative reporting risks creating a chilling effect on journalism.
The association argued that this trend, if unchecked, could embolden public officials and powerful private actors to weaponize the courts against scrutiny.
In response to the ruling, PRINPAG has encouraged journalist Innocent Samuel Appiah to challenge the decision through an appeal and has pledged its full institutional and legal support.
The association stressed that its intervention is not merely in defense of one journalist but in protection of the broader public interest and the constitutional right of citizens to be informed.
PRINPAG also announced plans to engage stakeholders and explore independent mechanisms to further investigate matters of significant public interest raised in the case, reaffirming its commitment to accountability journalism.
Calling on the Judicial Service to carefully reflect on the wider implications of such rulings, PRINPAG urged the courts to remain allies in the fight against corruption rather than obstacles to transparency.
The association emphasized that a strong democracy depends on a free and fearless press capable of holding power to account.
In closing, PRINPAG appealed to civil society organisations, media practitioners, and international partners to stand in solidarity with Ghana’s media fraternity in defence of press freedom, democratic governance, and the public’s right to know.
