Private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu has criticised what he describes as a growing pattern of arrests involving individuals accused of making insulting or offensive remarks about government officials, arguing that the practice could gradually undermine public confidence in the administration of President John Dramani Mahama.
Mr Kpebu claimed that the current government has recorded more arrests linked to matters of free speech within its first eighteen months in office than the administration of former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo Addo recorded throughout its eight year tenure.
He described the development as an unfavourable record for President Mahama and urged the government to reconsider the use of arrest and detention as a response to offensive political commentary.
Although Mr Kpebu acknowledged that insulting public officials was inappropriate, he maintained that arresting people over such statements was not an effective or appropriate way of addressing the problem.
“For one and a half years, this current government has arrested more people on matters of free speech than Akufo Addo’s eight years. It is a bad record for John Mahama; they should be careful. Mahama should pay attention,” he said during an interview on TV3.
According to the lawyer, continued arrests over politically charged statements could gradually diminish the goodwill that the Mahama administration currently enjoys, particularly if members of the public begin to perceive the government as intolerant of criticism.
He argued that governments should have sufficient confidence in democratic institutions to withstand harsh political commentary without resorting to law enforcement measures.
“These things start small; before he realises, all the goodwill is gone. Let the people talk. During Akufo Addo’s tenure, Mahama called him and others ‘Akyem sakawa mafia’; who arrested him?” Mr Kpebu asked.
He further argued that Ghana’s political history contains numerous examples of politicians, activists and public personalities making severe or controversial statements about governments and public officials without being subjected to arrest.
Mr Kpebu cited his own past remarks concerning former President Akufo Addo as an example, recalling that he had previously described the former president in highly critical terms without being arrested.
“We said Akufo Addo was stone deaf; ‘mampam’, did he arrest me? Nana Yaa Jantuah called Akufo Addo Nebuchadnezzar; she popularised it. Allow Ghanaians to talk,” he said.
The lawyer also referred to the late former President Jerry John Rawlings, whom he said openly made serious allegations against former President John Agyekum Kufuor during the latter’s time in office without being arrested.
“Late President Jerry John Rawlings called former President J.A. Kufuor, while in office, a thief. He didn’t arrest J.J. You can’t shut people down by arrests. I think the government should sit up. As for the insult, there is nothing you can do; it’s part of accountability,” he stressed.
Mr Kpebu said the government should instead encourage a broader national discussion about how democratic societies can respond to offensive public statements without unnecessarily resorting to arrest and detention.
He suggested that alternative measures could be considered in circumstances where individuals cross established legal boundaries, including financial penalties or public condemnation where appropriate. In his view, attempting to arrest every person who makes an insulting statement would be impractical and could have serious implications for democratic freedoms.
The lawyer’s comments come amid heightened national debate over freedom of expression, political criticism and the role of state institutions following the New Patriotic Party’s Democracy Under Attack demonstration held on Thursday, August 6.
The NPP organised the protest to draw attention to what it described as threats to the rule of law, constitutional governance and democratic accountability.
The opposition party has also accused the government of political persecution, selective application of justice and the alleged misuse of state institutions against political opponents and critics. The government has rejected those allegations.
The controversy has consequently renewed questions about the appropriate limits of political speech in Ghana and the extent to which state institutions should intervene when public commentary becomes offensive. Mr Kpebu’s position is that while insulting public officials may be undesirable, a democratic government should demonstrate sufficient tolerance to accommodate criticism and dissent without creating the perception that arrest has become the preferred response to political speech.
