Legal practitioner and former Board Chairman of the National Lottery Authority (NLA), Gary Nimako Marfo, has taken legal action against the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) and its investigative journalism arm, The Fourth Estate, for what he describes as a deliberate attempt to tarnish his reputation.
In a defamation lawsuit filed at the High Court in Accra on September 30, 2025, Mr. Nimako is demanding GHS10 million in damages, alongside a public apology and retraction of a report that alleged the NLA handed over a GHS3 billion revenue stream to KGL Technology Limited for a “peanuts” annual fee of GHS170 million.
The defendants include journalist Seth J. Bokpe, Executive Director of MFWA Sulemana Braimah, and three others associated with the publication. The article, which included Nimako’s image and linked him to controversial decisions made during his tenure, has drawn widespread public attention and backlash.
Mr. Nimako, through his legal counsel Marfo & Associates, contends that the publication was defamatory, lacked factual basis, and was aimed at fuelling public resentment toward him and former NLA board members. He argues that the report misrepresented the licensing arrangement between the NLA and KGL, and failed to reflect the legal and operational frameworks under which the deal was executed.
The former NLA Chair is seeking the following reliefs: a declaration that the article is defamatory, a declaration that it was published without cause, GHS10 million in compensatory damages, and a retraction and apology published with equal prominence as the original story.
The legal suit comes amid broader pushback against The Fourth Estate’s report, which has stirred national conversation on transparency and accountability in public institutions. Former NLA Director-General Samuel Awuku has also dismissed the report as “lopsided,” defending the Authority’s spending under the Good Causes Foundation and arguing that the KGL partnership has brought significant revenue and social benefits.
The unfolding legal battle underscores rising tensions between public office holders and media watchdogs, with issues of press freedom, accountability, and reputational damage all intersecting at the heart of the matter.
