Know Your Rights: Where Freedom of Expression Ends and Public Disturbance Begins

The right to free expression, enshrined in Article 21(1)(a) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, is the ultimate oxygen of our democracy. We pride ourselves on a culture of robust public discourse, media freedom, and the right to fiercely dissent against systemic failures. However, a dangerous misconception is quietly spreading through our local markets, digital timelines, and political spaces: the belief that the right to speak freely means the right to say or do anything, anywhere, without legal consequence.

A disturbing trend has taken shape across the country. Activists, social media creators, and ordinary citizens are increasingly finding themselves behind bars under the weight of archaic or overly broad criminal statutes. While the state claims it is preserving national stability, critics warn of a creeping “culture of silence”. If the average citizen does not know the exact legal boundary where legitimate democratic grievance ends and statutory criminality begins, our hard-earned liberties will slowly suffocate. True democracy does not exist in a vacuum of absolute, unbridled freedom; it thrives strictly within the secure boundaries of the rule of law.

The Legal Framework and Current Ghanaian Flashpoints

To properly exercise your rights and voice dissent safely, you must understand how Ghanaian law balances individual liberties with national stability, and how these laws are actively being applied:

• The Constitutional Balance (Articles 21(1)(a) & 21(4)): While the Constitution anchors your right to speak, it explicitly permits the state to pass laws restricting speech if they are necessary for national security, public safety, public order, or protecting the reputations of others.
• The Vague Weapon of "False News": Under Section 208 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), publishing a report likely to cause public fear, alarm, or disturbance—knowing it is false—is a crime. We saw this play out starkly when TikTok creator Isaac Boafo (Duabo King) was arrested by the Police Intelligence Directorate over viral videos alleging systemic corruption among officers.
• The Digital Surveillance Trap: Under Section 76 of the Electronic Communications Act, 2008 (Act 775), sending an internet message you know to be false or harmful is heavily penalized. The state’s active monitoring of social media highlights how quickly an online rant can translate into a physical cell.
• Provocation and Breach of Peace: Under Section 207 of Act 29, using threatening, abusive, or insulting language in a public space to provoke public unrest is strictly illegal.
• Targeting the Executive: Free speech does not insulate citizens from criminal charges if their rhetoric crosses into explicit threats. The high-profile arrests of figures like Mahama Aminat (Akosua Serwaa Minat) for allegedly threatening the Executive on TikTok, and Pastor William Gyimah for viral statements targeting state leadership, prove that law enforcement is zeroing in heavily on digital spaces.

The Legal Experts Weigh In

Prominent Ghanaian legal minds have consistently warned that while citizens must elevate the quality of their speech, the state's heavy-handed reliance on criminal codes is a dangerous overreach.

Renowned legal practitioner and broadcast journalist Samson Lardy Anyenini has strongly criticized the weaponization of the police force to suppress offensive opinions. Expressing concern over recent arrests, Samson Lardy Anyenini warned against 'ugly free speech abuse' while simultaneously defending the limits of state power:

Anyenini noted that speech rights are meant to safeguard democracy rather than serve as a license to malign others, while emphasizing that criminal prosecution under statutes like Section 208 and Section 76 is generally an inappropriate remedy for offensive speech.

Similarly, private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu has raised concerns about the selective enforcement of these broad colonial-era laws, noting they are often manipulated for political point-scoring rather than public safety. During an analysis of public order laws, Martin Kpebu called for a careful interpretation of free speech, remarking that political satire is vital and broad false news laws are frequently used to gag critics.

Actionable Recommendations for Citizens

Navigating public spaces, civil advocacy, and social media safely requires strict legal mindfulness:

• Attack the Policy, Not the Officer: Focus critiques on systemic institutional reforms rather than volatile personal insults that can trigger a Section 207 charge.
• Fact-Check Before Sharing: Verify digital content to avoid Section 208 penalties for spreading panic or falsehoods.
• Assemble Peacefully: Comply with the Public Order Act, 1994 (Act 491) when organizing demonstrations.

Urgent Suggestions for Institutional Reforms

Protecting public peace should not suppress lawful dissent. Key reforms include:

• Legislative Repeal: Calls to repeal or drastically narrow Section 208 of Act 29 function as modern proxies for criminal libel.
• De-escalation Training: Law enforcement should prioritize de-escalation via the Police Professional Standards Bureau (PPSB).
• Civil Remedies: Utilize civil courts or the National Media Commission (NMC) rather than immediate imprisonment.
• Legal Literacy: Scale up initiatives via the NCCE.

Balancing rights and civic responsibility is vital to safeguarding Ghana's democratic identity.

What do you think?
Has law enforcement gone too far in arresting citizens for viral videos, or are these strict measures necessary to preserve national peace in Ghana? Share your thoughts, experiences, and perspectives in the comments section below!

✍️ Submitted by:
Retired Senior Citizen
For and on behalf of all Senior Citizens of the Republic of Ghana 🇬🇭

Teshie-Nungua
[email protected]