Former Special Prosecutor and Attorney General Martin Amidu has raised fresh concerns about the government’s proposed Security and Intelligence Agencies Bill, 2025, describing it as unconstitutional and unnecessary.
He argued that the bill represents an attempt to create and empower an “anointed National Security Coordinator” outside the constitutional framework established under Article 83 of the 1992 Constitution.
In his latest statement, Amidu said the existing Security and Intelligence Agencies Act, 2020 (Act 1030), which re-enacted the 1996 law (Act 526), already fulfills the constitutional and democratic requirements for managing the nation’s security agencies.
“The existing law was operationalized during the existence of the Constitution since 1996 when the NDC government enacted Act 526 to bring the operations of the Security and Intelligence Agencies into conformity with the constitutional and democratic mandates of the Constitution, particularly Article 83 thereof,” he explained.
He maintained that for Parliament to accept and consider the new bill, the government must clearly demonstrate that the current law is defective or inconsistent with the Constitution.
“Act 1030, which is substantially a re-enactment of Act 526, must therefore be shown by the bill before Parliament to offend against the constitutional design, structure, and scheme or to be defective as required under Article 106(2)(a) of the Constitution,” he stressed.
According to Amidu, introducing a new law merely to expand the powers of the National Security Coordinator is unconstitutional.
“It is unconstitutional to introduce a bill in Parliament just for the sake of providing for an anointed National Security Coordinator whose office predates the 1992 Constitution and continued to exist and exercised functions under Acts 526 and 1030,” he said.
“To give for the first time to such a person express supraordinate powers of coordinating the activities of the Security and Intelligence Agencies in the country is a violation of the constitutional order.”
Amidu argued that both Act 526 and Act 1030 recognize the authority of a Minister of State who is responsible for national security and accountable to Parliament. Any attempt to weaken that ministerial authority, he said, would destabilize the chain of command.
“Any attempt to dilute the powers of the Minister responsible for Security and Intelligence Agencies by elevating the National Security Coordinator to have by law supraordinate supervisory responsibilities over the agencies is a potential recipe for disaster and turf war,” he warned.
