The government has consequently announced the initiation of legal proceedings against Ebang Engonga and his accomplices through the Public Prosecutor’s Office, aiming to hold them accountable before the law.
The Government of Equatorial Guinea has filed a lawsuit against the former Director General of the National Financial Investigation Agency, Baltasar Engonga.
Engonga was accused of misconduct following his alleged involvement in a s3x tape scandal.
The government claims that Engonga’s actions are an affront to the nation’s values.
Jerónimo Osa Osa, the Minister of Information, Press, and Culture, made the announcement over the weekend, condemning Engonga’s alleged conduct.
“The actions of the ex-anti-graft agency chief violate the ethical and moral values of noble Equatorial Guinean society,” Osa Osa stated, emphasizing the government’s commitment to upholding high moral standards.
The Minister further disclosed that the Equatorial Guinean Government, through the State Attorney General’s Office, would conduct a thorough investigation to address Engonga’s alleged violations.
Local media, Ahora EG reported, “This decision comes after several videos went viral in which Ebang Engonga is seen having s3xual relations with multiple women, some of whom are married.”
The government reacted on Friday in an official statement, condemning these acts as “violations of the ethical and moral values of noble Equatorial Guinean society.”
The government has consequently announced the initiation of legal proceedings against Ebang Engonga and his accomplices through the Public Prosecutor’s Office, aiming to hold them accountable before the law.
“In light of these serious events, which severely undermine family and social cohesion, and considering the negative impact that this situation has on the good image of our country, tarnishing its reputation, the government, through the Public Prosecutor’s Office, has commenced a thorough investigation to establish responsibilities at the administrative, civil, and criminal levels, given the possibility of a public health impact,” reported the government spokesperson.
The government further stated it would assess various parameters, such as the distinction between personal and private spheres, prior consent (explicit or implicit), violations of privacy, damage to individuals’ honour and prestige, and the rights of those harmed by these events, including the state itself.
