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 dangerous setback to press freedom, investigative journalism and the fight against corruption in Ghana.
In a statement signed by its President, Mr. David Sitsope Tamakloe, PRINPAG expressed profound concern and disappointment over the decision by Justice Nana Brew granting an interlocutory injunction against investigative journalist, Mr. Innocent Samuel Appiah.
The ruling restrains the journalist from publishing findings of an investigation into alleged corruption involving Ms. Cynthia Adjei and the Lysaro Group.
A form of prior restraint on the media
PRINPAG said the ruling, which was issued before the publication of any investigative report, amounts to prior restraint and represents a worrying intrusion into the constitutionally guaranteed independence of the media.
According to the association, preventing a journalist from publishing investigative findings in advance undermines the media’s role as the Fourth Estate and weakens public interest journalism.
It cautioned that such judicial interventions could embolden individuals and institutions seeking to shield themselves from scrutiny through legal manoeuvres rather than transparency.
“This ruling raises serious questions about judicial support for press freedom and accountability in Ghana,” the statement said, warning that it could set a precedent that chills investigative reporting across the media landscape.
Media is not an extension of state investigators
PRINPAG also took issue with suggestions emerging from the case that journalists should restrict their work to collaborating with state investigative bodies such as the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
The association stressed that the media’s constitutional mandate is not to operate as an appendage of state institutions, but to function independently as watchdogs in the public interest.
Limiting journalists to state-led investigations, it argued, misrepresents the essence of press freedom and erodes the media’s ability to expose wrongdoing wherever it occurs.
“The responsibility of the media is to pursue the truth and hold power to account, not to wait for permission from the state,” PRINPAG emphasised.
Public accountability cannot be optional
The association further expressed deep concern that the court appeared to accept arguments insulating the respondents from journalistic scrutiny on the basis that they operate as private businesses.
PRINPAG argued that Ghana’s democracy cannot thrive if individuals or entities with proximity to public office or influence over state-related transactions are shielded from public accountability.
It warned that drawing artificial lines between private business and public interest creates safe havens for corruption and abuse of influence.
“In matters involving alleged links to public power and state dealings, journalistic scrutiny is not optional—it is essential,” the statement noted.
Implications for anti-corruption efforts
While reaffirming its respect for the judiciary and due process, PRINPAG cautioned that the ruling risks encouraging a broader trend in which public officials and their affiliates weaponise the courts to frustrate media oversight.
Such a trajectory, the association said, is incompatible with Ghana’s stated commitment to transparency, accountability and the fight against corruption.
It warned that silencing investigative journalists weakens national anti-corruption efforts and ultimately denies the public its right to know.
PRINPAG backs appeal, pledges support
PRINPAG has urged Mr. Innocent Samuel Appiah to file an appeal against the ruling and pledged to provide all necessary legal and institutional support.
The association said its stance goes beyond defending one journalist, stressing that the broader principle at stake is the protection of the Ghanaian public’s right to information.
“Investigative journalism is a public service, not an adversarial act,” the statement said, adding that the ruling has only strengthened the resolve of media practitioners to pursue accountability journalism.
Call to the judiciary, civil society and the public
As part of its response, PRINPAG disclosed that it is consulting with key stakeholders to explore mechanisms for independently verifying and further investigating matters of significant public interest raised by the case.
The association also called on the Judicial Service of Ghana to reflect carefully on the wider implications of rulings that may appear to constrain press freedom or weaken anti-corruption efforts.
It stressed that the courts must be seen as partners in accountability, not sanctuaries for those seeking to avoid public examination.
PRINPAG urged civil society organisations, Ghanaians and international partners to stand in defence of press freedom and democratic integrity, insisting that the media will not relent in its constitutional duty.
“The principles of transparency, accountability and free expression are the foundation of our Republic,” the statement concluded. “They must be defended without compromise.”
