Controversial Ghanaian movie producer Socrate Safo has called for the prosecution of ace investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas for screening his recent investigative work, ‘Ghana In The Eyes Of God’, at the International Conference Centre without seeking clearance from the Ghana Cinematography Board of Control.

According to Mr Safo, Chief Executive of Movie Africa Productions, the Cinematography Act 1961 (ACT 76) makes it mandatory for Anas to have presented the contents of his journalistic work to the Cinematography Board for viewing and classification before its public screening.

Ahead of the screening, Socrate Safo made an attempt to get the Board to stop the journalist from letting the public view the video at the conference centre but was not successful.

“I personally went to the office of the Classification Board to lodge a formal complaint against Anas who is screening his production in public without classification as stipulated in the law books of Ghana. The Secretary of the Board told me he can’t stop Anas because that is a special case, though it is against the law.

“I spent over thirty minutes at his office, but he refused to move, not even when I volunteered to personally assist the office to enforce the law. I left his office so disappointed and regretted for my past—the past where I assisted the Board to chastise, reprimand and place a fine on my fellow FIPAG members (Abdul Salam and John Dada aka Double Date), who have released different versions of their movies on the market though it has been classified. Double D was incarcerated for about seven days in custody before we pleaded for him,” Socrate Safo narrated.

He continued: “As we speak, film producers are compelled to show classification certificates before registering their films with ARSOG or allowed to release on the market. Our films are subjected to censorship instead of classification, an illegality under the Constitution of Ghana. Producers also have to pay money for this illegality. Folks, need I say more?”

Tiger Eye, the company Anas works for, declined a direct response when NEWS-ONE reached them over Socrate’s complaint.

An official of the company said their core mandate was to do private investigations but not to engage in media debates with people.

Others have also opined that what Anas screened at the Conference Centre was more of his journalistic work rather than a movie or a film and so the Cinematography Board has no business editing or censoring the contents of a journalist’s works.

The work shown was a three-hour secretly recorded video of several judges and court officials across the country meeting with one sided litigants outside the courtroom to plot how to tilt justice in favour of one party.

In many instances, the judges or court officials were captured on video receiving monies, goats, yams and other gifts from litigants whose cases were pending before the courts.