Vice President of Policy Think Tank, IMANI Africa, Bright Simons has resolved to defend his statements against businessman Ibrahim Mahama.
Business magnate Ibrahim Mahama and his company, Engineers & Planners (E&P), have filed a defamation suit against policy analyst and social commentator Bright Simons, seeking GHS10 million in general damages.
The writ of summons, filed at the Accra High Court, accuses Mr. Simons of publishing false and malicious statements that have damaged the reputation and business standing of both the entrepreneur and his company.
According to the statement of claim, the plaintiffs allege that Bright Simons made defamatory assertions in an article published on his website and social media platforms.
Among the claims cited are suggestions that E&P is financially distressed following a temporary suspension of mining operations by Gold Fields at the Damang Mine, where E&P is a contractor.
The plaintiffs argue that Mr. Simons’ claims — including allegations that E&P’s creditors are “up in arms” and that the President’s brother is influencing mining policy for personal gain — are entirely without basis.
The suit states that such comments imply that Mr. Mahama is leveraging his familial relationship with former President John Dramani Mahama to secure unfair business advantages.
The plaintiffs contend that the statements have tarnished their reputations, raised concerns among business partners and financiers, and undermined E&P’s creditworthiness in the mining sector.
They maintain that the publications were done “with malice” and intended to lower their standing in the eyes of the public.
But in a tweet reacting to the suit, Bright Simons explains that he will fight the suit after careful consideration.
He described it as SLAPP, indicating that “we consider his lawsuit as intended to deter the most basic coverage of his affairs even if it touches on public interest (in the US, such suits are called SLAPPs – https://anti-slapp.org/what-is-a-slapp). The fact that the government has nationalised a mine where he is the prime contractor suggests the possibility that he could continue delivering services there, but this time to a state-owned mine. That alone makes him a fair target for public interest scrutiny”.
Read His Post Below
1. This afternoon, I saw in the media that the brother of Ghana’s President has filed a suit against me for defamation. I also got a copy of the writ online.
2. He is unhappy because: A. I said his company has been “hit” financially as a result of a mining company’s decision to suspend some operations, which his company had hitherto been paid to support; and B. Also that some of his creditors have been “up in arms” due to, among other factors, the financial pressures emanating from the Damang situation.
3. After studying the suit carefully, my lawyers and I have resolved to defend the above statements vigorously in court.
4. It is basic common sense that if a service that is paid for is suspended, there will be financial consequences.
5. It is also basic common sense that when creditors loan money, and there are delays in payback, that they will “protest vigorously”. The idiom, “up in arms”, simply means “protesting vigorously”.
6. It is common knowledge that Mr. Ibrahim Mahama’s company was given a loan of $68 million to expand/retool the fleet at Damang in 2020 and that there have been delays in payment leading to credit loss provisioning. Creditors normally “protest vigorously” when that happens.
7. After publishing the article which is the root of the lawsuit, I had a conversation with Mr. Ibrahim Mahama during which I requested that he provides any documents that can shed further light on these issues. He chose not to do so.
8. We consider his lawsuit as intended to deter the most basic coverage of his affairs even if it touches on public interest (in the US, such suits are called SLAPPs – https://anti-slapp.org/what-is-a-slapp). The fact that the government has nationalised a mine where he is the prime contractor suggests the possibility that he could continue delivering services there, but this time to a state-owned mine. That alone makes him a fair target for public interest scrutiny.
9. We bear no malice towards Mr. Ibrahim Mahama. But we shall not be deterred from continuing to scrutinise any dealings of his that we believe have public policy implications. 10. As I like to say, accountability is a marathon. We look forward to establishing through the discovery process in court that I have published nothing defamatory about Mr. Ibrahim Mahama. Every inference was based on pure fact, common sense, and analytical judgement. My full statement is here: https://brightsimons.com/2025/05/when-the-presidents-brother-sues-you/
