Ghana risks reintroducing its repealed criminal libel law through the back door. This warning comes from Sulemana Braimah, Executive Director of the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA). He states that police arrests for alleged false publications undermine press freedom and bypass civil legal processes.
These police actions resemble the criminal libel regime abolished over two decades ago. Braimah highlighted the arrest of broadcaster Kwabena Bobie Ansah. This arrest followed claims about former First Lady Rebecca Akufo-Addo acquiring state lands. The MFWA opposed this arrest, arguing that established legal avenues existed for defamation claims.
This trend fits into a broader concern about media freedom in Ghana. The country repealed its criminal libel law in 2001. This move was a significant step towards protecting free speech. The law had allowed the state to prosecute individuals for defamatory statements. Its repeal shifted such cases to civil disputes between individuals.
Mr. Braimah spoke on Joy FM's Super Morning Show on Monday, July 20. He discussed press freedom following a one-year jail sentence for a TikToker. This individual was jailed for publishing false information. Braimah questioned the difference between not having the criminal libel law and the current police actions. He emphasized that the repealed law made defamation a state-prosecuted criminal matter. Now, it should be a civil dispute between individuals.
The MFWA's position was clear regarding the Kwabena Bobie Ansah case. If the First Lady felt defamed, she had several options. These included going to the National Media Commission, demanding a retraction, or suing for defamation. Braimah stated that police storming a radio station to arrest a presenter was untenable. Such actions, he argued, negate the purpose of repealing the criminal libel law.
Braimah warned that continued police pursuit of individuals for media statements suggests a return to the old approach. He believes this was not the intention when the criminal libel law was repealed. He advocates for civil remedies through courts or alternative dispute resolution. These mechanisms allow individuals to seek redress if they feel offended by publications.
He also raised concerns about selective enforcement. Braimah noted that many individuals peddle falsehoods daily on mainstream media during political debates. He questioned why police do not pursue these cases. He believes police lack the capacity to monitor all public commentary across various platforms. This includes radio, television, and social media.
Braimah renewed his call for a comprehensive national framework to tackle misinformation. He stressed that civil remedies remain available for those who feel defamed. This framework should focus on what is allowed and what is not. It should not rely solely on arrests and prosecutions.
He also called for greater accountability for social media platforms. Many individuals spread abusive or false content from outside Ghana without consequences. He cited examples of individuals like Kelvin Taylor, who operate from abroad. Braimah questioned the political class's commitment to tackling abusive online content. He noted that some who condemn such conduct have celebrated those accused of it.
Braimah warned that relying on arrests and imprisonment will not stop misinformation. Those responsible could simply relocate their operations abroad. He suggested that individuals might set up operations in countries like Côte d'Ivoire or the Netherlands. From there, they could continue to attack and incite people. A comprehensive approach is necessary to address these complex issues effectively.