President John Mahama’s administration has recorded nearly twice as many speech-related arrests in 16 months as the previous administration did in eight years.

Development Diaries reports that Ghanaian TikTok creator Isaac Boafo, popularly known as Duabo King, was arrested in March 2026 over a viral video containing false claims about police officers, becoming the 14th person arrested for a speech-related offence since President Mahama returned to office in January 2025.

Only eight such arrests were recorded throughout the entire eight-year administration of former President Nana Akufo-Addo, raising questions about why a government that once condemned these tactics is now relying on them more frequently.

In politics, freedom of expression often seems to enjoy its greatest protection when politicians are sitting in opposition. Once they move into government, the same speech they once defended suddenly begins to look like a threat to public order.

When opposition rhetoric meets political power

In 2022, Mahama warned that using state institutions to intimidate critics was dangerous for democracy. Four years later, the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) says 14 people have been arrested under laws that criminalise speech considered capable of causing fear, alarm, or public disturbance.

Authorities have relied mainly on Section 208 of the Criminal Offences Act of 1960 and Section 76 of the Electronic Communications Act of 2008. Both laws predate today’s digital environment and contain broad provisions that critics say can be used against legitimate public commentary.

It is understood that bloggers have been arrested for commentary on police conduct, social media users have been detained for posts involving financial institutions, and some digital creators have faced prosecution for content authorities deemed false or offensive.

Government supporters argue that social media has increased the spread of misinformation and that existing laws are being enforced. But that explanation does not address why an administration that previously criticised speech-related arrests is now using the same laws more aggressively.

What the arrests reveal

Terms such as ‘fear and alarm’ and ‘false news’ are broad enough to mean almost anything authorities want them to mean on any given day. While that flexibility may be convenient for enforcement agencies, it leaves citizens guessing where criticism ends and criminality begins.

There is also the concern that enforcement is concentrated more among bloggers, content creators, and online commentators rather than established media organisations.

It is understood that most of those arrested are individuals operating without the legal protection, financial resources, or institutional backing available to major media houses, making them easier targets in a system where defending oneself can be as costly as the prosecution itself.

Every arrest also sends a message beyond the individual involved because when enough people watch content creators being arrested, many begin to edit themselves before the government has to do it for them.

Citizens’ rights

Ghana’s constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression under Article 21, while Article 162 limits the circumstances under which citizens can face criminal liability for publishing false information.

The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights also protects the right to receive and share information, while the African Commission’s Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression requires restrictions on speech to be necessary, proportionate, and narrowly defined.

But sections 208 and 76 fall short of those standards because their broad language allows subjective interpretation and selective enforcement.

The burden of these arrests falls heavily on younger Ghanaians who use digital platforms as their primary avenue for civic participation, political commentary, and public engagement.

Unlike politicians, media owners, or large institutions, many digital creators depend on their online presence for income and visibility. So an arrest, therefore, affects their freedom of expression and livelihoods.

What needs to happen

Citizens and civil society organisations should push Parliament’s Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs to review Sections 208 and 76 before the 2027 election cycle and establish clear standards for determining when speech becomes a criminal offence.

The MFWA and the Ghana Journalists Association should also formally petition the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights to review the compatibility of these arrests with regional freedom of expression standards.

As for the Attorney General’s office, it should publish a clear framework explaining how decisions are made in digital speech cases, what evidence is required before prosecution, and how proportionality is assessed.

If a government can criticise speech-related arrests while in opposition and increase them while in power, citizens have every reason to ask whether the problem lies with the laws, the politicians, or a political culture that only discovers the value of free expression when it is out of office.