On the 23rd and 24th of September, The Democracy Hub, a Ghanaian civil society organization led by Oliver Baker Vormawor, notified the Police of their intention to undertake a demonstration pursuant to their right enshrined under article 21(1)d of the 1992 Constitution. The demonstration was intended to expose the devastating effects of illegal mining (galamsey) in the country and was scheduled to take place at the #37 interchange in Accra, Ghana’s capital city.
When the Police demanded a change of venue for the demonstration, however, the organizers refused to comply. This resulted in the arrest of about 39 protesters who were charged with conspiracy to commit a crime, unlawful assembly, causing public disorder,and obstructing public officers in the performance of their duty. These arrests occurred despite a failed attempt by the Police to secure a formal ex-parte injunction against them two days prior to the demonstration. Notably, the Police had been informed of the protest more than a month in advance as required by law.
Following their arrest, the protesters were kept in police custody and were subsequently arraigned before the Accra circuit court where they were remanded for 12 days awaiting their judgment. The series of events sparked widespread outrage among youth activists, lawyers, parliamentarians and other stakeholders of the country and has since birthed at least two petitions to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice, an independent state institution, to carry out investigations into the abuse of the rights of these protesters. Consequently ,a new movement #Free the citizens has emerged on various social media handles advocating for the immediate release of the detained protesters and that prosecution be redirected to the illegal miners who stand at the epicenter of environmental degradation.
In my view, the recent surge in small-scale illegal mining activities, particularly with the involvement of foreign actors, has transformed the historically modest practice into a nightmare that threatens to wipe out the future of water resources in Ghana. The introduction of sophisticated machines has ravaged more than sixty percent of major water reserves in the country. If this continues, experts predict that Ghana may be forced to import water by 2030 – a dire consequence for a country once abundant in natural water resources.
The treatment of the protesters in police custody moreover raises serious concerns of constitutional violations. Under articles 15,17 and 19 of the 1992 Constitution, all persons have the right to be treated with dignity, the right to equality before the law and the right to fair trial respectively. Yet these protesters were kept in custody for more than forty-eight hours without the option of bail, and reports indicate that they were denied food and water during their detention. It was reported that Oliver Baker Vormawor was ill and was in dire need of medical attention during these hard times. These acts amount to clear violation of the Constitution. Furthermore, the requirement to notify the police of intended demonstrations was construed in the landmark case of New Patriotic Party V Inspector General of Police as merely an information or awareness given to the police for security of the demonstrators and not permission as it was a constitutional right.
This entire incident raises critical questions about the powers, limitations and responsibilities of the Police. These answers are decisive of whether or not the rule of law and constitutionality is expected to continue. Have we really considered the preamble to our constitution? The very first clause of the Constitution affirms power being vested in the citizens. This untold occurrence is a magnified version of a similar demonstration that happened earlier this year. This pain is heightened by the fact that it happened just a day after Ghana marked Nkrumah Memorial Day. It is a tragic irony that on the eve of celebrating the legacy of a leader whose rally words were “Ghana our beloved country is free forever” we as a nation are confronted with a situation that calls intp question the rights and freedoms of the citizens in a supposed democratic state.
Opinions expressed in JURIST Dispatches are solely those of our correspondents in the field and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST’s editors, staff, donors or the University of Pittsburgh.
