Photo of Samuel Nartey George giving a speech. Image by Amuzujoe on Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0 Deed).
By Abdul-Razak Mohammed
Accra’s bustling streets hum with the chatter of market vendors, the popular midday radio show hosted by Aunty Naa, and the glow of smartphone screens. But beneath this familiar rhythm, a quieter battle is unfolding that could reshape Ghana’s democracy. At its center is Samuel Nartey George, the newly appointed Minister of Communication, Digital Technology, and Innovation, whose office now wields unprecedented power over what Ghanaians see, hear, and say.
Sam George’s expanding control over Ghana’s media
Samuel Nartey George’s recent appointment as Minister of Communication, Digital Technology, and Innovation marks a significant turning point in Ghana’s media and digital governance landscape. As the head of this important ministry, Sam George oversees the National Communications Authority (NCA). This is an agency entrusted with regulating all forms of communication, including radio, television, and digital platforms. The NCA’s mandate is not limited to ensuring compliance with technical standards; it is also charged with monitoring the content disseminated across the nation, together with the National Media Commission (NMC). This broad regulatory scope falls squarely under George’s purview, placing him in a position of immense power over public discourse. With this authority, he not only shapes the media environment but also holds the potential to silence dissenting voices and marginalize groups deemed counter to his vision of traditional Ghanaian values.
At the heart of the controversy surrounding his appointment is the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Act, 2024, which opponents say is anti-LGBTQ+ as it offers prison time for “engaging in same-sex intercourse,” disbands all queer organizations in Ghana, and criminalizes promoting LGBTQ+ activities. George was one of the bill's sponsors and has ardently defended the bill. In a recent media interaction, George reaffirmed his commitment to the bill, stating that he and his colleagues have reintroduced it to parliament. Although Parliament has been recalled from recess, no official update has been provided on the current status of the bill.
Ostensibly designed to preserve Ghanaian cultural and moral values, the bill explicitly criminalizes the “propaganda of, promotion of, and advocacy for” activities that support LGBTQ+ rights. The law mandates a summary conviction penalty ranging from five to ten years in prison, a range that applies not only to individuals but also, under certain circumstances, to media houses and digital platforms. This legal framework is purposefully broad and vague, allowing for a wide interpretation of what constitutes “propaganda” or “promotion.” Such language provides a formidable tool for state control and grants the minister the power to unilaterally punish media entities, even before the bill is formally reintroduced in Parliament.
A chilling effect on freedom of expression
A close reading of the Act reveals that its provisions do not differentiate between individual actions and the operations of institutional media. Any medium that facilitates the dissemination of content supportive of LGBTQ+ advocacy can be held criminally liable unless it can demonstrate that it did not consent to, or was not complicit in, the offending activity. This effectively means that the owners of broadcasting companies or digital platforms may be subject to prosecution if they host content that falls within the Act’s expansive prohibitions. The result is a chilling effect on free expression, where media outlets might preemptively censor themselves to avoid the risk of severe legal repercussions. In this context, it is clear that the minister’s office, empowered by the NCA, can be used to stifle any form of dissent or deviation from the prescribed national narrative.
The implications of such concentrated power are profound and far-reaching. In today’s interconnected world, where digital platforms serve as vital channels for political mobilization, cultural expression, and public debate, the ability to control or suppress content can fundamentally undermine democratic processes. Sam George’s position, coupled with the authoritarian potential of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Act, raises significant concerns about the future of media freedom in Ghana. With unilateral authority to penalize media houses and digital platforms, the ministry under Sam George’s leadership is poised to enforce a strict conformity to a narrow, state-sanctioned version of morality and tradition. This could lead to the systematic targeting of not only LGBTQ+ individuals but also any groups or voices that challenge the prevailing conservative ideology.
Ghana at a crossroads
The dangers inherent in such a system are not merely theoretical. International examples offer stark warnings of the outcomes when state power is leveraged to control digital expression. In countries like Russia, Egypt, Thailand, and even Chechnya, the combination of expansive surveillance capabilities and draconian legal measures has resulted in the suppression of dissent, the stifling of opposition, and widespread human rights abuses. In Ghana, previous reports have indicated the use of advanced surveillance tools such as NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware to monitor political adversaries. With the NCA already implicated in such activities in the past, and now under the stewardship of a minister who champions restrictive policies, there is an alarming possibility that similar tactics could be used to enforce the new bill’s provisions.
As Ghana teeters on the edge of a repressive digital era, the stakes could not be higher. The convergence of expansive state surveillance powers and legally sanctioned censorship creates an environment in which the fundamental rights of free expression and access to information are under constant threat. The NCA, which is under Sam George’s care, with its ability to unilaterally punish media outlets and digital platforms, becomes a potent instrument of control, capable of shaping public discourse according to the government’s ideological agenda. In such a scenario, the future of democratic engagement in Ghana hangs in the balance, and the voices of those who dissent, advocate for minority rights, or simply challenge the status quo may be silenced before they can be heard.
Sam George’s appointment and his sponsorship of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Act, serve as a powerful illustration of the risks posed by unchecked state power in the digital age. The NCA, under his watch, is not merely a regulatory body but a potential mechanism for enforcing a narrow, state-approved narrative and one that could significantly curtail media freedom and marginalize vulnerable communities. If Ghana’s democracy is to survive, it cannot afford to let its press be muzzled by those who seek to control the narrative.
Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of any democratic society. The time to defend it is now.
