Yvonne Actually Crossed The Legal Line

Yvonne ‘Nelson’ has written and Ghanaians are reading. What is left to be done is a legal and critical analysis of what has been written and what is being read.

Yvonne ‘Nelson’ in her recent book “I AM NOT YVONNE NELSON” is said to have recalled her past, by making statements suggestive of a previous amorous relationship with Sarkodie.

As usual, such a story will definitely trend and top the chats in Ghana, and after reading the book, with particular reference to the chapter on Sarkodie and the abortion, what I have not heard anyone talk about is the possibility of Yvonne lying in her book.

It is surprising to me that almost everyone I have heard on Yvonne’s book, believes all that Yvonne says about Sarkodie in her book.

What Ghanaians should pay attention to is the fact that this book is a self-serving narative or self-serving book of Yvonne’s past. Once people set out to write about their past, they are at liberty to present the story or event as they wish, and from a perspective as they like.

The legal effect of self-serving narratives is that the courts do not place priority on them when it comes to evidential purposes, for the reason that it has the possibility of twisted events or false naratives presented in a way that favours the author.

The courts are always inclined to believe in a book written about a person’s past by someone else other than the said person.

A self-serving narative such as Yvonne Nelson’s book will not stand the test of being used in court to prove its content. It would have been different if Yvonne’s Nelson’s book was written by some other person other than herself.

What Yvonne has said in her book about Sarkodie is defamatory and there’s no two ways about that.

To publish statements (that Sarkodie got you pregnant and asked you to abort the pregnancy without due care and attention to your life and the life of the unborn child) about an internationally recognised musician, married to a respectable woman and perceived by the Ghanaian society as a responsible father is defamatory, because such statements if perceived to be true will lower the integrity and reputation of Sarkodie in the eyes of the right-thinking Ghanaians.

Defamation is a term used to describe the act of making false statements or allegations that are likely to harm another person’s reputation. Defamation can arise in published books or contents, and this can have serious legal repercussions for the publisher or author. Moreover, defamation can also arise in social media posts or websites.

It is important to note that truth is a defence to a defamation claim in Ghana. If the statement made is true, it cannot be considered defamatory. I am wondering how Yvonne will prove her allegations against Sarkodie without reference to her book should Sarkodie come out to deny the truth in the said statements.

My education to the general public is that before you write a self-serving piece, make sure you have other evidence outside of your piece, capable of proving the content of your piece. As such, it is essential to ensure that the information being published is accurate, is in the public interest, and does not harm any particular individual or group.

What Yvonne should have done was to have gone silent on the identity of Sarkodie, and left him as anonymous. To go that mile in her book opens her up for a possible defamation suit by Sarkodie if those statements are untruths.