Ghanaian Supreme Court Nominee Advocates for Criminalizing Online Misinformation
Accra, Ghana – Justice Sir Dennis Dominic Adjei, a nominee for the Supreme Court of Ghana, voiced strong support for criminalizing the spread of misinformation and disinformation online during his appearance before Parliament’s Appointments Committee on June 16, 2025. Justice Adjei, currently a Justice of the Court of Appeal, argued that existing laws criminalizing certain acts offline should extend to the digital realm. His statements come amidst growing national debate regarding the proliferation of fake news and the government’s potential response.
Responding to questions from Anthony Mmieh, Member of Parliament for the Odotobri Constituency, Justice Adjei affirmed his belief that creating or disseminating false information online, including the use of fake accounts, should be considered a criminal offense. He drew parallels to existing laws under the Communications Act that prohibit actions such as exposing someone’s nudity or making statements prejudicial to national security, emphasizing that these offenses should apply irrespective of whether they occur in the physical world or online.
Justice Adjei rejected concerns that such legislation could impinge on free speech, asserting that it would merely extend existing legal frameworks to the digital sphere. He argued that if an act is already considered a crime when committed offline, it should also be punishable when committed online. He stressed that criminalizing online activities that are already illegal offline would not represent an overreach of government power.
The nominee’s statements come as the government considers legislation to combat the spread of false information, a subject that has sparked intense discussion and scrutiny in recent months. While Communications Minister Ursula Owusu-Ekuful has hinted at the possibility of a dedicated law to curb the spread of misinformation and disinformation, several media rights organizations have expressed apprehension, warning that such legislation could be misused or exploit existing vague legal provisions.
Critics point to existing laws, such as the Criminal Offences Act 1960 (Act 29), the Electronic Communications Act, 2008 (Act 775), and the Cybersecurity Act 2020 (Act 1038), arguing that these laws already contain provisions that could be used to suppress dissent or limit freedom of expression. They contend that the government’s focus should be on enforcing existing laws and promoting media literacy rather than enacting new, potentially restrictive legislation.
The debate over online misinformation and disinformation is complex and multi-faceted. Proponents of regulation argue that the spread of false information poses a significant threat to democracy, public health, and national security. They point to instances where fake news has incited violence, undermined trust in institutions, and interfered with elections. They believe that legislation is necessary to hold those who spread false information accountable and to protect the public from its harmful effects.
Opponents of strict regulation, however, caution against any measures that could stifle free speech or chill legitimate online discourse. They argue that vague or overly broad laws could be used to target journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens who express dissenting views. They also raise concerns about the potential for censorship and the difficulty of defining what constitutes “misinformation” or “disinformation.” They advocate for a more nuanced approach that focuses on media literacy, fact-checking, and platform accountability.
The nomination of Justice Adjei, with his outspoken stance on criminalizing online misinformation, adds another layer of complexity to the ongoing debate. His confirmation to the Supreme Court could have significant implications for the future of online speech and the government’s efforts to regulate the digital landscape. If approved by Parliament, Justice Adjei’s interpretation of existing laws and his support for expanding their reach to online platforms could influence future court decisions related to online content moderation and the regulation of misinformation.
The tension between combating the spread of false information and safeguarding freedom of expression is a global challenge. Many countries are grappling with the difficult task of finding a balance between protecting the public from harm and ensuring that fundamental rights are not infringed upon. Ghana’s ongoing debate, highlighted by Justice Adjei’s recent statements, reflects this global struggle.
The Parliamentary Appointments Committee will now deliberate on Justice Adjei’s nomination, along with the nominations of six other individuals, before making a recommendation to the full Parliament. Should Parliament approve his nomination, President John Dramani Mahama will formally appoint him to the Supreme Court. The outcome of this process will undoubtedly shape the future of legal discourse surrounding online misinformation and its regulation in Ghana. The ensuing legal interpretations and precedents will have far-reaching consequences for freedom of expression and the evolution of the digital landscape in the country. This crucial juncture necessitates a careful consideration of the potential impacts of any legislative or judicial action, balancing the need to combat harmful misinformation with the fundamental right to freedom of expression.