The Author: Evans Senior Owu – Columnist
Ghana is having an important democratic conversation. It is about freedom of expression, and it is about who speaks for whom when the state acts.
In recent weeks, the arrest and detention of political commentators, most notably the NPP Bono Regional Chairman, Kwame Baffoe alias Abronye DC, have rekindled a familiar debate. Opposition voices call it a crackdown. Pro-government voices call it the rule of law. Both sides are, in part, right. Both sides are also, in part, wrong.
But there is one actor whose role in this political theater deserves closer scrutiny: the ruling party communicator who moonlights as a police spokesperson.
The Legal Framework
The arrests in question invoke Section 76(1) of the Electronic Communications Act, 2008 (Act 775). The law criminalizes knowingly sending a communication that is false or misleading and likely to endanger the safety of any person or disrupt life-saving services.
Section 76(2) goes further. It presumes knowledge where an individual failed to take reasonable steps to verify a statement’s accuracy. That is a meaningful legal standard. It is not a dragnet for ordinary political speech.
Abronye DC is already standing trial for a similar offence at the time of his latest arrest. That context matters. These include publication of false news and conduct conducive to a breach of the peace under Sections 208 and 207 of the Criminal Offences Act (Act 29).
The Case Itself
Were the arrest, detention, and remand lawful? Broadly, yes. A pattern of similar offences is precisely the kind of evidence the law envisions when courts weigh bail decisions.
The trial judge refused bail. Minority Leader Hon Afenyo-Markin publicly dismissed the judge as a politician in a robe who failed to apply the law. That charge is not only unfair — it is inaccurate.
The law provides clear guidance on bail discretion. Where a prosecution demonstrates that an accused person was already before the courts for a like offence, a judge may lawfully refuse bail on the basis that the accused is likely to re-offend while on bail. The accused had demonstrably shown that pattern. The judge applied the law.
Criticizing state institutions is democratic. Scandalizing a court over a decision one disagrees with is not. The Minority Leader once urged Ghanaians to exercise a measured tone toward the courts. He would do well to remember that counsel today.
That said, one aspect of the police conduct warrants legitimate scrutiny. Arresting Abronye DC in the Bono Region and transferring him to Accra rather than prosecuting him locally unnecessarily concentrates political tension in the capital. It is the kind of decision that, regardless of its legality, invites the accusation of political theatre.
The Communicator Problem
The Ghana Police Service sits within the executive arm of government. It holds coercive powers of the state. Those powers must remain accountable, not explained away, not cheered on, and not defended as a matter of partisan loyalty.
When government communicators rush to justify every police action, they do not strengthen democratic governance. They corrode it. They blur the line between the ruling party and a state institution that must serve all Ghanaians, regardless of political affiliation.
Our democracy grows when state institutions are held to account on the merits of their actions. It shrinks when party communicators treat institutional accountability as a threat to be managed.
Principled Consistency
Ghana’s political culture has a chronic ailment. Political actors who once cried foul about police overreach in opposition often become the loudest defenders of the same conduct in government. This is not leadership. It is political convenience dressed in institutional language.
Principled leadership means assessing each case on its own facts. It means being willing to say: the arrest was lawful, but the transfer to Accra was unnecessary. It means being willing to say: the bail refusal was legally sound, but the prosecution should respect the fundamental human rights of the accused.
It does not mean repeating police press releases or framing every criticism of state action as an attack on democracy.
On Dr. Bawumia’s Statement
Former Vice President and NPP 2028 flagbearer Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia issued a strongly worded statement condemning the arrest and detention of Abronye DC. Condemnation of perceived abuse of power is a legitimate democratic exercise.
That is not the issue. The issue is the warning he attached: that state officials responsible for what he termed abuse of power will one day be held accountable. That remark was ill-advised.
A statesman of Dr. Bawumia’s standing must distinguish between political solidarity and democratic principle. Publicly championing a figure with a well-documented pattern of vitriolic, offensive public discourse does not demonstrate strength of character. It raises questions about the judgment that would guide him in office.
Leadership sometimes demands the courage to look associates and loyalists in the eye and say: You were wrong. Dr. Bawumia has yet to demonstrate that particular form of courage.
The Democratic Ask
Ghana deserves a political class that treats state institutions as institutions, not as extensions of whichever party currently holds power. Government communicators have a role. It is to explain policy, build public understanding, and ensure the ruling party is accountable to its own promises.
It is not to serve as press officers for the Ghana Police Service or any of the state institutions established to possess some considerable functional independence.
Let the police speak for the police. Let the courts speak through their judgments. And let our political communicators find the discipline to resist the temptation to speak for everyone, especially when silence, or honest nuance, would serve the country far better.
READ ALSO: UN Human Rights Chief Warns Against Forced Return of Afghan Refugees
