The architecture world is reeling after widely publicised allegations of gross misconduct have been made against Pritzker Prize-winning Architect Sir David Adjaye, the man most famous for his seminal work on the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C.
Three former employees of the founder of Adjaye Associates have accused him of inappropriate behaviour, unfair dismissals, and attempted rape, among other things.
The allegations were first published by the Financial Times (FT) on Tuesday, sparking a storm of media frenzy and sending the world of architecture into apparent meltdown.
However, the Tanzanian-born British-Ghanain citizen, through his lawyers, Farrer & Co., has vehemently fought back against allegations of gross sexual misconduct made against him by three of his former employees, offering detailed responses to each claim in two formal letters sent to the FT in response to a Request for Comment made before the allegations were published.
The first letter was dated April 26, 2023, and the second was dated June 11, 2023.
Citi News has all two letters. The Request for Comment was made in an email to Sir Adjaye by the FT’s Josh Spero.
“The Request for Comment makes a number of extremely serious allegations against our client, some of which would (if true) constitute sexual misconduct of a criminal nature,” one of the letters dated April 26, 2023, said.
“These allegations are inaccurate and highly defamatory of our client. The allegations clearly have the potential to cause serious and irreparable harm to our client’s reputation and his business, unquestionably meeting the test in Section 1 of the [UK’s] Defamation Act 2013.”
It went on, “In order to justify the publication of such serious allegations to your readership, you will need to have a very strong basis for believing they are true. Our client vigorously denies any suggestion that he has committed “sexual offences” or engaged in “emotional abuse”, and contemporaneous evidence is at odds with this version of events.”
Although the letters to FT were labelled “Strictly Private and Confidential” and “NOT FOR PUBLICATION,” the lawyers made it clear that their “client’s rights remain expressly reserved, including the right to rely on the contents of this letter should the need arise in due course.”
Sir David Adjaye’s legal counsel challenged the credibility and motivations of the three women, whose identities were concealed by the FT’s publication.
“The allegations made by the alleged victims are false, extremely serious, and defamatory,” the lawyers said, setting the tone for the robust rebuttal that followed.
One of the most serious allegations involves an incident on September 7, 2018, in Ghana. The first victim alleged that Adjaye behaved inappropriately in an apartment in Accra, a claim that the second victim purportedly confronted him about. In response, Adjaye’s lawyers stated in their letters to FT, “Our client categorically denies being confronted by (one of the accusers) on September 7 or 8, 2018 or ‘on that weekend’ about the alleged incident in the Accra apartment.”
They further claimed that they were sacked from their jobs without serious concerns or queries about their work performance being raised.
However, Sir Adjaye’s team of lawyers has categorically refuted these claims, highlighting different reasons for their termination.
For (one of the accusers), the statement reads in part, “(the accuser’s) employment was terminated following her disclosure of sensitive Company information to a client,” and for the other person, her “employment with the Company was terminated following allegations concerning altercations with other staff members.”
Furthermore, a letter allegedly regarded as an attempt at extortion by one of the accusers, demanding $120,000, an amount more than twice her annual salary, is currently being scrutinised by Adjaye’s legal team. They describe the letter as further evidence of the questionable credibility of Sir Adjaye’s accusers.
The statement also disputes one of the accuser’s denial of a prior “intimate” relationship with Adjaye before her employment with the renowned architect. His legal team reveals, “Around this time, while (she) was in London, our client and (the lady) embarked on a casual but intimate relationship on a few occasions for a short period of time before becoming friends.”
In a further response detailed in a subsequent letter dated June 11, 2023, Sir Adjaye’s lawyers explain, “Our client first met (the said lady) in London in or around 2010. Around this time, while (she) was in London, our client and (the lady) embarked on a casual but intimate relationship on a few occasions for a short period of time before becoming friends. (She) was later hired at the Company, as our client acknowledges, because they were friends and he knew her. He accepts that hiring (her) on this basis was wrong, but he also felt she would be an asset to the company in the early stages of the Ghana office.”
It added, “As stated in our letter of April 26, our client categorically denies any accusations of criminal misconduct made against him. Such allegations are false and highly defamatory of our client. Our client has acknowledged, as has been explained previously, that his conduct has fallen significantly short of the standards he should have adhered to, as regards blurring personal and professional boundaries and having had relationships with persons subsequently employed by Adjaye Associates (the Company). This does not justify the publication of criminal allegations against our client, as appears to be intended from the Request for Comment and the Further Request for Comment.”
A separate incident concerning the movement of rugs in South Africa and an alleged attempted rape in a disabled bathroom at Johannesburg airport form the main pillars of (her) allegations. Sir David Adjaye’s legal team disputes the allegations, asserting, “Our client and (the said lady) did not visit our client’s apartment on the morning of June 2, 2019.”
“Our client’s flight only left Johannesburg airport at 01:55 on the morning of June 2. It is the case that on June 1, our client and (the said lady) returned to the apartment with (the lady) and the rugs, as he was concerned that he would need a bag in which to put the rugs so that they could be checked in at the airport ahead of his flight that day. Our client and (the lady) reached the airport too late to check in the bag; our client, therefore, attempted to put the rugs into his hand luggage in the foyer of the airport.
“The opening of the luggage was difficult and was causing issues in the foyer area of OR Tambo airport, and he could not fit them into his carry-on bag. Our client and (the lady) therefore moved aside to a disabled toilet to carry out the switching of the rugs from our client’s bag to the bag that (she) would be taking. That bag was the suitcase that our client had been unable to check-in. Our client then left the bag with (the lady) and rushed to make his flight.”
It added, “We do not accept (the lady’s) account because it contradicts our client’s. On the face of it, (her) account seems to be that our client directed her into a disabled toilet for no apparent reason before trying to rape her. In a busy international airport, where our client was rushing to catch a flight, this purported version of events does not stand up and is inherently implausible.
“For the avoidance of doubt, our client restates his absolute denial that he attempted to rape (the lady) on this occasion (or indeed on any other occasion) in the strongest possible terms. As you will be well aware, this allegation is of the utmost seriousness and is extremely defamatory of our client.”
The allegations and their fallout continue to unfold, casting a cloud over the distinguished career of Sir David Adjaye, who maintains his innocence against these severe allegations. In their closing remarks, Adjaye’s legal team warns, “This allegation is of the utmost seriousness and is extremely defamatory of our client.”
To conclude, the April 26, 2023 letter stated, “As detailed above, the Request for Comment contains accusations of criminal conduct against our client, amongst other very serious allegations. These allegations clearly have the potential to destroy our client’s reputation and that of his business and are seriously defamatory of him.”
The letter continued, “Our client strenuously denies any allegations of criminal behaviour or serious misconduct. He denies mistreatment of staff, of “preying” on black women (or indeed any women), and denies the allegations put forward by those making the claims (name withheld). As discussed above, each of these individuals has their own grievances against our client and the Company, and the evidence does not support the very serious allegations that are currently being levelled against him. We reserve the right to rely upon this evidence should you publish allegations to the effect that our client has engaged (or there is any basis for suggesting he has engaged) in criminal or non-consensual sexual misconduct.”
It added, “Our client nonetheless acknowledges that he has blurred the boundaries between his professional and personal lives. He acknowledges that this conduct does not match the high professional standards that he should be setting for himself. He has and will take steps to change this. However, the (criminal) allegations described in the Request for Comment are not supported by records of communications between the parties and our client or other contemporaneous evidence.”
There is also clear evidence of threats to extort, the letter said, “as there is of the identifiable individuals having their own agendas. You are now on notice of these matters and of our client’s unequivocal denial of any accusations of criminal sexual misconduct.”
As these globally circulated allegations continue to reverberate through the architecture world and beyond, only time will tell how the claims will impact Sir Adjaye’s glittering career and golden reputation.