Registering Land Should Not Require Knowing Someone: The Case for AI Assisted Public Services

“Do you know anyone at the office?” It is a question that should have no bearing on a person’s ability to access a public service. Yet when a procedure feels confusing or an application appears to have stalled, finding someone who can explain what is happening can seem like the only practical option. For a person trying to register land, that uncertainty carries considerable weight. A home, a business or years of savings may depend on getting the process right.

Ghana’s Lands Commission should make clear, dependable guidance available to every applicant. Knowing an officer, having a relative who understands the process or being able to pay someone to follow up should offer no advantage in obtaining basic information. Artificial intelligence could help widen access to that information, provided it is built around verified guidance, accessible communication and accountable human decisions.

Consider an applicant preparing documents for the first time. The person may want to know which service applies, what supporting records are required, where to submit them and how to pay the approved fees. These are ordinary questions. A well designed AI assistant could answer them in plain language, guide the applicant through an official checklist and explain unfamiliar terms.

Its usefulness would depend on the source of its answers. The assistant should draw from guidance approved and maintained by the Commission. When requirements change, the information available to citizens should change with them. Where a question falls outside that guidance, the system should direct the applicant to an authorised officer.

An answer that sounds confident but is wrong could cost someone another journey, an unnecessary payment or a rejected submission. The assistant must therefore be able to acknowledge uncertainty. It should also distinguish general guidance from advice about a particular application. Explaining the documents usually required for a service is different from deciding whether an applicant’s documents establish a valid claim.

Language is an equally important part of access. A citizen may understand the history of a family property perfectly well while struggling to describe it in formal English. A service that offers guidance in Ghanaian languages could help more people ask questions comfortably and understand the answers they receive.

Multilingual assistance would require careful preparation. Terms concerning ownership, consent, inheritance and boundaries should be reviewed by people who understand both the language and the subject. Literal translation may leave an applicant with a misleading impression. Voice options could help people who find reading difficult, but users should always have a way to reach a person when an explanation remains unclear.

Application updates could remove another source of frustration. Once a submission is received, the applicant should obtain a reference number and a clear acknowledgement. SMS messages could then communicate meaningful developments, such as a request for a missing document, completion of a review or readiness for collection.

The wording matters. “Your application is being processed” tells a person very little when it appears repeatedly without further explanation. An effective update should identify what has happened and what the applicant must do next. If no action is required, it should say so. If there is a delay, the applicant should be told the reason and how to seek clarification.

Basic updates should be available without requiring a smartphone or regular data purchases. An applicant using a simple mobile phone should be able to receive messages and obtain help through an official telephone service. Messages should also protect privacy, avoiding sensitive ownership details that could be read by someone else using the phone.

Online support could connect these services. After verifying their identity, applicants could ask about the recorded stage of their application or retrieve an explanation of an outstanding requirement. The system should report information from the actual application record. It should never invent a progress update because a citizen has asked for one.

Access to a human officer must remain straightforward. A land application may involve conflicting records, a disputed boundary or a family disagreement that cannot be resolved through a conversation with an automated assistant. When such issues arise, the system should refer the matter to the appropriate officer and preserve the details already provided, so the applicant does not have to begin again.

Assisted service desks would remain essential. Some citizens will need help scanning documents, navigating a portal or understanding a response. Others may prefer to speak with someone directly. Staff at these desks should use the same approved guidance as the digital assistant, giving applicants consistent information across service channels.

Consistency also requires explanations when circumstances differ. Two applications may legitimately require different documents or follow different procedures. Officers should be able to explain those differences clearly. A citizen should not be left wondering whether a requirement reflects the nature of the application or the preferences of the person attending to it.

Accountability must extend beyond the quality of information. Every substantive decision should remain attributable to an authorised officer. Applicants should receive understandable reasons for decisions affecting them, along with a clear route for correction, complaint or review. Responsibility cannot disappear behind the phrase “the system says so.”

The Commission should assess these services through the experience of citizens. Are people making fewer unnecessary visits? Are answers accurate across languages? Are outstanding requirements explained clearly? Can complaints reach someone with the authority to resolve them? These questions would reveal whether the technology is improving public service.

Registering land will sometimes require patience and careful investigation. Obtaining basic guidance should be easy. A citizen deserves to know what to submit, what to pay, where an application stands and who can explain a decision. AI assisted services could help deliver that standard, allowing more Ghanaians to approach land registration with confidence, whether or not they know anyone at the office.