Pardon the TikToker; she should have been sued for defamation, not jailed- Franklin Cudjoe tells Mahama

Founding President of IMANI Africa, Franklin Cudjoe, has told President John Dramani Mahama to grant a presidential pardon to the TikToker who has been jailed for false publication against the President.

For him, the prosecution of the TikToker was unnecessary.

"So which overfed and pampered prosecutor brought this case against the woman? Is he or she not deliberately sabotaging the President? Did AG Dominic Ayine and Justice Sai know about this case? And the judge? You actually jail a person who says the President buried 32 cows to help him spiritually win the elections? I would have been shy to even entertain such comedy in my court! Alas, as an accessory to this comedy, the court became a theatre that staged a comedy of errors! What is this??

"Mr. President, please reject this senseless persecution in your name! Please pardon Ms. Alhassan! " he wrote on Facebook.

In another post, he said "Just watched the videos of the woman insulting the President. She is clearly a bush illiterate! She should be sued for defamation not jailed."

Camilla Alhassan has been sentenced to one year in prison after she pleaded guilty to offensive conduct and the publication of false news.

The widely circulated videos led to her arrest and prosecution by the Ghana Police Service. Before sentencing, the court had ordered a pregnancy test during an earlier hearing.

Camilla Alhassan admitted to publishing videos falsely claiming, without evidence, that President John Dramani Mahama buried 32 cows as part of rituals to win the 2024 general election.

Speaking after the ruling, her lawyer, Kwadwo Gyamfi Bonsu, said the court struck out the charge of electronic abuse, holding that it did not have the legal authority to determine that offence.

However, the court convicted Camilla on the count of offensive conduct and imposed a one year custodial sentence.

According to the lawyer, the defence appealed for a lighter punishment, but the court indicated that the growing prevalence of such offences required a sentence that would discourage similar conduct.