The defamation case initiated by Anas A. Anas against Kennedy Agyepong was heard by the High Court (General Jurisdiction 2) in Accra on March 15, 2023. After reviewing the evidence presented at the trial, the court came to the following conclusions:

ANAS A. ANAS AS THE PLAINTIFF

I conclude by saying that, while all the statements based on Exhibits KOA1, KOA2, KOA3, and KOA4 were true and factual, supporting the defendant's justification and fair comment defense, the statements in Plaintiff's Exhibit C, while potentially defamatory, were not proven to have defamed the Plaintiff. I thought the plaintiff's allegations lacked validity. Consequently, it is discarded.

The plaintiff, Anas A. Anas, has experience as both a lawyer and a "world-renowned investigative journalist." In his capacity as the plaintiff, Anas A. Anas knew and willingly ordered that his case be filed by one Listowell Bukarson. This was made possible by a power of attorney allowing him to file the lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiff, Anas A. Anas, on June 18, 2018, for damages in the amount of GHS25 million. When the defendant submitted his statement of defense on November 13, 2018, the writ of summons was modified on November 20, 2018. On January 21st, 2019, Plaintiff responded in order to end the pleading. the lawsuit being brought by an attorney on behalf of a principal is not controversial and is enabled by law.

Every conduct in any court that is legally necessary or allowed to be taken by a party within may be taken by an authorized representative. The question is whether the plaintiff's lawyer can testify on his behalf about things that fall outside his professional field. Did the lawyer see or hear about the alleged transactions? The lawyer was unable to speak about what the plaintiff personally saw or heard due to the necessity that he only speak about what he truly saw or heard.

Hearsay is prohibited from being used as evidence by law. Since he fears his own shadow as an anti-corruption entrepreneur instead of a sincere anti-corruption campaigner, Anas A. Anas, the plaintiff, put himself in a position where he could not give significant and fundamental evidence in person and be cross-examined. As a result, Anas A. Anas was denied the one chance he had to publicly give the court his account of the events as he observed them and to be submitted to cross-examination to defend his credibility. Real crusaders against corruption don't cover their faces by wearing masks.