A fierce legal showdown has erupted between two emerging political groups Base Ghana First LBG and The Base Movement, over the alleged misuse of name, identity, and official materials.
Base Ghana First LBG, a breakaway faction from The Base Movement founded by Ghanaian actor Alexander Kofi Adu, has dragged its former parent body to the High Court in Accra, accusing it of deception and deliberate misrepresentation.
In court documents, the plaintiff argues that although both groups were originally part of the same movement, deep internal disagreements, leadership disputes, and what it describes as “procedural abuse” forced members to split and establish Base Ghana First LBG in March 2026.
The suit alleges that tensions escalated after the chairman of The Base Movement unilaterally suspended the organisation’s activities, removed key executives from official platforms, and set up a new nine-member council — moves the plaintiffs insist violated the group’s constitution.
Feeling sidelined and rendered ineffective, the aggrieved executives broke away to form a new entity, which they claim has since rapidly expanded nationwide due to strong grassroots support and internal commitment.
However, the plaintiffs say their success has been undermined by what they describe as calculated attempts by The Base Movement to hijack their identity. According to the filing, the defendant is allegedly using the name “The Base Ghana First” on souvenirs, official items, and even signage at its headquarters — creating confusion among the public and potential investors.
“The defendant is deliberately misleading the public and attempting to ride on the goodwill of the plaintiff,” the suit states, accusing The Base Movement of falsely presenting both organisations as one and the same.
Base Ghana First LBG warns that unless the court intervenes, the alleged misrepresentation will continue to damage its reputation and operations.
The group is therefore seeking a perpetual injunction to restrain The Base Movement from using its name, logo, or any similar branding in dealings with the public. It is also demanding general damages, legal costs, and any additional relief the court may deem appropriate.
