Limits to free speech

Democratic governance depends on open disagreement, with space for citizens to criticise public officials and defend their rights without fear.

Free speech protects that process and helps change happen from the bottom up.

Democrats everywhere agree that free speech matters – a lot – in a democracy.

Free speech allows people to challenge what they see as bad ideas, question those in power, and share knowledge that might otherwise be ignored.

When people are allowed to speak freely and openly, state institutions face more scrutiny and, as a result, there is a better chance that solutions to problems will emerge.

In other words, free speech contributes to good governance. 

Free speech

Free speech and press freedom are constitutionally guaranteed in Ghana under Chapter 12 of the 1992 Constitution.

Yet, this environment functions in a paradoxical state: Ghana boasts a highly liberalised media and ranks among Africa’s top defenders of free speech (rising from 52nd to 39th globally in the 2026 Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index; https://rsf.org/en/index); at the same time, journalists and citizens regularly face intimidation, harassment, and state-backed arrests.

The Accra-based Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) recently condemned what it regards as increasing examples of what it claims is a weaponisation of Section 76 of the Electronic Communications Act, 2008 (Act 775), and Section 208 (sometimes paired with Section 207) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), to criminalise speech in Ghana.

Arrests

The issue of free speech is currently both topical and controversial, a political hot potato for the Mahama administration.

According to MFWA, the first 16 months of the current government have seen more people arrested using these laws than during the eight years of the previous NPP administration.

MFWA recorded 14 arrests linked to the application of these laws in the last 16 months, compared to eight arrests recorded over the entire eight-year tenure of the previous administration led by President Akufo-Addo.

The laws have been applied to arrest presenters, journalists, TikTokers, bloggers, political activists, and ordinary citizens for their comments or publications, including on social media.

The Attorney General, Dr Dominic Ayine, has pushed back against claims by the opposition that the government is criminalising free speech. He notes that constitutional protections for free expression come with limits under Ghanaian law.

Recently commenting on ongoing political tensions over arrests and prosecutions linked to public commentary, Dr Ayine stated that while the 1992 Constitution guarantees fundamental freedoms, including free speech, it does not permit abuse of those rights in ways that threaten public order.

MFWA has itemised the circumstances of the arrests during the current administration.

They have been made for various reasons, including: ‘false claims about police officers stationed at the Central Command Police Station in Kumasi, that public officials are involved in galamsey, and for threats against the president and vice-president.   

The arrests bring into focus the issue of at what stage free speech becomes unacceptable in a democratic society.

Are public threats against the well-being of prominent public officials, including the president and vice-president, okay? Do they count as free speech or are they a threat to public order? In short, is it acceptable publicly to threaten the president and vice-president? 

Limits to free speech

Dr Ayine claimed that “if someone … is inciting hatred, in our society … [we] should [not] sit down as a government to allow the person to go on’.

Ghana, he said, must remain alert to the dangers of inflammatory speech, particularly through media platforms.

Dr Ayine added that ‘it was the use of the radio, the use of the media that incited the genocide that eventually took place in Rwanda.

And we have not gotten there’.

Many would agree that freedoms crucial to democracy – of expression, assembly and demonstration – are not absolute.

Speech which incites hatred or violence should not be protected under the guise of free expression, even in a democracy such as Ghana.

Dr Ayine makes a good point that such conduct has historically contributed to instability and worse in other countries, including Rwanda.

The problem, however, is that such a defence of censorship is open to abuse.

Civil society must stay alert and keep the issue of free speech on the front burner.

The writer is Emeritus Professor of Politics, London Metropolitan University, UK