Lawyers for First Atlantic Bank Limited, have written to The Herald demanding for an apology and a retraction of last Friday’s publication from court processes filed by a client of the bank headlined “First Atlantic Bank Officials Embroiled in GH₵50 Million Scandal”.
A two-page letter signed by one Lawyer Augustine B. Kidisil, Head of Disputes of Ferociter Chambers, an Accra-based law firm and sent to The Herald, confirmed that First Atlantic Bank is embroiled in a legal tussle with a client, but denied any wrongdoing on the part of the bank.
“..Our Client has been sued in a frivolous action by a former customer simply because our Client legitimately exercised its rights as a creditor to protect the domestic bonds the customer had used as security for a facility it took from our Client.
“It is important to note that our Client has not only filed a robust defence to the action, but also filed a counterclaim against that former customer for various reliefs. Again, our Client is not aware of any pending court proceedings against it for circa GH₵50 Million in any matter involving bonds as your publication falsely claims.
DEMAND FOR RETRACTION AND APOLOGY REGARDING DEFAMATORY ARTICLE
More Read
We act as lawyers for First Atlantic Bank LTD (our Client or the Bank). We are writing to address a grave matter that has shaken our confidence in the journalistic integrity of your newspaper, The Herald.
The recent article published under the title “First Atlantic Bank officials Embroiled in GH₵50 Million Scandal” on 8th December 2023 does not only demonstrate a shocking disregard for factual accuracy but crossed the line into the realm of defamation and prostitution of your paper for character assassination.
Particularly, our Client takes serious exception to the allegations that it is “entangled in yet another scandal”, it is “diverting Eurobond investment of nearly GHC 50 million” belonging to a customer, or that it was involved in “the scandalous Frontiers COVID test kit scandal”.
Our Client is not involved in any court proceedings regarding Eurobond investments as wrongly alleged in your scandalous publication. Perhaps if your publication had complied with basic journalistic ethics and asked the Bank for comments, these inaccuracies would have been avoided.
For instance, our Client has been sued in a frivolous action by a former customer simply because our Client legitimately exercised its rights as a creditor to protect the domestic bonds the customer had used as security for a facility it took from our Client.
It is important to note that our Client has not only filed a robust defence to the action, but also filed a counterclaim against that former customer for various reliefs. Again, our Client is not aware of any pending court proceedings against it for circa GH₵50 Million in any matter involving bonds as your publication falsely claims.
Having deliberately distorted these basic facts, it is not surprising that the rest of your article is devoted to sullying the reputation of our Client under the guise of reporting on what appears to be phantom court proceedings that only you and the ‘undisclosed prominent businessman’ know about.
If your publication were an unbiased and objective reportage of real court proceedings, the identity of this so-called businessman who supposedly sued our Client will not be “undisclosed”.
The blatant inaccuracies and misrepresentations in your publication are intended to unduly influence public opinion against the Bank and to create an atmosphere of prejudice that undermines the very essence of a fair legal process in the court proceedings involving our Client.
The inaccuracies and distortions in your publication are not only a breach of journalistic ethics but also a violation of the legal rights and reputation of our Client.
We demand that you take the following actions immediately:
1. Issue an immediate and prominent retraction of the defamatory article, clearly acknowledging the inaccuracies and misleading information presented.
2. Issue a public apology to our Client for the reputational damage inflicted by the false statements contained in the article.
3. Publish your retraction and unqualified apology on your website and all digital platforms where the defamatory article has been disseminated. Should you fail to comply with this demand within 7 days of the date of this letter, our Client will pursue legal and regulatory actions against you, Prime Mark Company Ltd, and any other involved parties.
This letter is not intended as a full statement of the facts or our Client’s legal rights all of which are expressly reserved.
Sincerely yours
