Lawyers for Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin have rejected claims that their client is delaying or avoiding service of a writ on Ghana Gold Board (GoldBod) Chief Executive Officer Sammy Gyamfi in a defamation suit.

Dehyena Chambers, representing Mr Afenyo-Markin, says the writ was served on Mr Gyamfi’s lawyers after they formally notified the High Court that they had his “express instructions and authority” to accept service on his behalf.

The clarification follows an earlier report that Mr Gyamfi had authorised his lawyers, Ayine & Partners, to receive the writ and accompanying processes in the suit filed by Mr Afenyo-Markin.

Read Also: Defamation suit: Sammy Gyamfi authorises his lawyers to write to High Court to receive writ

In a statement dated Saturday, August 29, Dehyena Chambers said the writ was filed on August 24, 2026, and that two days later, Ayine & Partners wrote to the Registrar of the High Court, General Division, Accra, indicating that they had authority to accept service on Mr Gyamfi’s behalf.

According to the lawyers, a court bailiff subsequently served the writ on the law firm.

“On 26th August 2026, an Accra-based law firm by name Ayine & Partners, per a supposed lawyer named Seth Nyaaba Esq., wrote to the Registrar of the High Court informing him that the law firm had Mr Sammy Gyamfi’s ‘express instructions and authority’ to accept service of the writ on his behalf,” the statement said.

“It was with this understanding that a bailiff from the registry of the court duly served the Writ on the firm,” it added.

Lawyers say writ was later returned

Dehyena Chambers, however, said Mr Gyamfi’s lawyers returned the writ to the court registry on August 27, claiming that their client had changed his mind about service through the firm.

The lawyers further alleged that a subsequent attempt by the court bailiff to serve Mr Gyamfi personally at his office was unsuccessful.

“On that same day when the Bailiff then attempted personal service on Mr Sammy Gyamfi at his office, he refused to accept the service of writ and instructed his security personnel to send the bailiff out of the building,” the statement said.

The law firm therefore described as “untrue” claims that Mr Afenyo-Markin was avoiding service.

“It therefore cannot be the Plaintiff who is avoiding service of the writ on the Defendant as alleged on social media. This is a muddling of the rules of civil law practice in Ghana which must be disregarded,” it stated.

Lawyers cite High Court rules

Dehyena Chambers also cited Order 7, Rule 12(2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47), arguing that service on a lawyer who has undertaken in writing to accept service on behalf of a defendant amounts to valid service.

The provision states that where a lawyer undertakes in writing to accept service of a writ on behalf of a defendant, the writ is deemed to have been duly served when it is served on that lawyer.

On that basis, Mr Afenyo-Markin’s lawyers maintain that Mr Gyamfi has already been validly served.

“In any event, under Order 7, rule 12(2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 C. I. 47, a writ is duly served once it is delivered to a lawyer who has undertaken in writing to accept service on behalf of a client. Accordingly, Mr Sammy Gyamfi has been validly served,” the statement said.

The lawyers urged those disputing the validity of the service to desist, saying the correspondence between the parties and the bailiff’s official record would establish what occurred.

“Whatever be the situation, once his solicitors accepted the writ, Mr Sammy Gyamfi is fixed with Knowledge of the writ against him and is required by law to file his appearance and defence to the suit before the Court,” the statement added.

Background to the defamation suit

Mr Afenyo-Markin filed the suit at the Accra High Court on August 24 following comments made by Mr Gyamfi during the August 22 edition of JoyNews’ Newsfile programme.

The Minority Leader alleges that Mr Gyamfi defamed him by describing him as an “extortionist” during a discussion concerning GoldBod and reported losses associated with the Bank of Ghana’s Domestic Gold Purchase Programme.

Mr Afenyo-Markin is suing Mr Gyamfi and Multimedia Group Limited and is seeking damages, a retraction and apology, as well as an injunction against further publication of the alleged defamatory statements.

The dispute followed weeks of exchanges between the two politicians over the performance of the Domestic Gold Purchase Programme and questions raised by the Minority Leader about reported losses linked to the programme.

Mr Gyamfi’s August 26 notice through Ayine & Partners had indicated that he was willing to receive the court processes through his lawyers, with the notice specifically authorising the firm to accept service on his behalf.

The latest statement from Mr Afenyo-Markin’s lawyers now introduces a dispute over whether that written authorisation resulted in valid service and whether the subsequent return of the writ affects the status of the proceedings.

The substantive case is yet to be determined by the court.