Shatta Wale takes legal action against TikToker

Ghanaian dancehall musician Charles Nii Armah Mensah Jr., popularly known as Shatta Wale, has taken legal action against social media personality Priscilla Kyeremaa, popularly known as Prisywan, over comments she made about him in a TikTok video.

In a letter dated September 10, 2026, lawyers for Shatta Wale, Porta Legis Consultancy, accused Prisywan of making false and damaging statements about the musician in a video published on her TikTok page, “prisywan1”, on August 29, 2026.

The lawyers said the video was published a day after Shatta Wale granted an interview to broadcaster Serwaa Amihere on August 28 and was directed at issues arising from that interview.

According to the lawyers, Prisywan made several comments about the musician, including: “Shatta I am so sorry. I am sorry for saying this but you have to take your mental health seriously. Like you need to prioritize it.”

She also described him as a “confused artiste.” The lawyers argued that, when considered in their ordinary meaning and the context in which they were made, the comments suggested to viewers that Shatta Wale had a mental health problem that required serious attention.

They said the description of him as a “confused artiste”, coupled with the comments about his mental health, was capable of creating a disparaging impression of him.

Porta Legis Consultancy said Shatta Wale considers the assertions and insinuations to be “false, malicious, reckless and seriously injurious” to his reputation, dignity, character and professional standing.

The lawyers also took issue with the fact that the comments were made publicly on TikTok and were subsequently circulated by bloggers and social media users, thereby reaching an audience beyond Prisywan’s followers.

The letter described Shatta Wale as a prominent public figure and established artiste whose reputation and personal brand are central to his professional and commercial activities.

‘I was referring to Sarkodie and Shatta Wale’ - Stonebwoy on 'convenient friendship' jab

The lawyers argued that public statements questioning his mental health and describing him as a “confused artist” could cause substantial reputational and commercial harm.

The lawyers further alleged that the August 29 publication was not an isolated incident, claiming that Prisywan had, over a considerable period, repeatedly made publications and comments about Shatta Wale and his brand.

According to the letter, the musician views this as a continuing pattern of conduct in which Prisywan allegedly attacks and disparages him in circumstances that appear calculated to generate attention and visibility for herself.

Legal representatives of Shatta Wale also referenced previous complaints allegedly made to the Police by some of Shatta Wale’s colleagues over similar conduct attributed to Prisywan.

The lawyers said the latest publication must therefore be considered against what they described as a background of previous conduct.

The lawyers also pointed to the timing of the TikTok video, noting that Shatta Wale’s interview with Serwaa Amihere took place on August 28, while Prisywan’s video was published the following day.

They said the circumstances gave their client “reasonable grounds to believe that it was deliberately made in response to the interview and with the intention of ridiculing, discrediting and damaging his reputation.”

According to the letter, the alleged consequences of the publication went beyond embarrassment.

The lawyers said Shatta Wale had a meeting scheduled with investors on August 31, 2026, which was subsequently cancelled.

They added that their client believes the negative publicity generated by the video and its widespread circulation contributed to the cancellation, adversely affecting his professional and commercial interests.

The lawyers, however, stated that Shatta Wale does not object to legitimate criticism, fair comment or disagreement with his opinions or public statements.

“As a public figure, he accepts that his views and conduct may attract public scrutiny. What our Client objects to is the publication of statements and insinuations concerning his mental health and character which are false and damaging and which, when communicated to a wide audience, are capable of exposing him to ridicule, contempt and reputational injury,” the letter stated.

Shatta Wale’s lawyers have given Prisywan 48 hours from receipt of the letter to remove and permanently delete the TikTok video and any other publications containing the same or substantially similar statements about the musician.

They are also demanding a clear and unconditional retraction of the comments, specifically the description of Shatta Wale as a “confused artist” and the statements concerning his mental health.

In addition, the lawyers want Prisywan to issue a written apology to Shatta Wale, acknowledging that the statements and insinuations concerning his mental health and the description of him as a “confused artist” were inappropriate and unfounded.

The apology and retraction, they said, must be published on the TikTok page “prisywan1” as well as every other social media platform where the alleged offending material was published, reposted or disseminated.

They also want her to take reasonable steps to ensure that the retraction and apology reach substantially the same audience that saw the original publication.

Prisywan has further been asked to provide a written undertaking that she will cease and desist from publishing, repeating, reposting or causing to be published any further false, defamatory or disparaging statements concerning Shatta Wale.

The lawyers stressed that deleting the video alone would not satisfy their demands, arguing that the alleged damage could not be remedied simply by removing the post after it had already been viewed and circulated.

They warned that if Prisywan fails, refuses or neglects to comply fully within the 48-hour deadline, Shatta Wale has instructed them to take further legal action without additional notice.

Such action, according to the letter, could include civil proceedings, injunctive relief, claims for damages, costs and any other remedies available under Ghanaian law.







AK/AM