Introduction
Ghana’s legal and human rights communities are debating the Cybersecurity Amendment Bill 2025. Although the Bill intends to improve national cybersecurity and fight cybercrime, a number of its provisions jeopardize citizens’ constitutional rights and dangerously expand governmental monitoring capabilities. A increasing threat to due process, freedom of speech and privacy is hidden beneath its security story.
Problematic Clauses and Their Implications
Section 45A(1): Unrestricted Surveillance Powers
The provision gives law enforcement organizations and the Cybersecurity Authority (CSA) the authority to “intercept, monitor and record any communication or data transmission deemed necessary for national security or public order.” This clause is dangerously ambiguous. The word “deemed necessary” circumvents judicial review and gives authorities unrestricted power. It is against Article 18(2) of the Ghanaian Constitution of 1992, which states that no one may have their residence, correspondence, or communication privacy violated unless it is permitted by law and a court.
Section 46(3): Mandatory Data Disclosure by Service Providers
This section compels telecommunications and internet service providers to provide access to subscriber information, metadata and communication logs upon request from the Authority. This effectively turns private companies into state surveillance agents. It denies citizens the protection of confidentiality in digital communication. According to Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), individuals are entitled to protection against arbitrary interference with privacy.
Section 47B: Broad Powers of Arrest and Search
This provision authorizes the Authority to enter any premises or access any electronic device suspected of containing information relevant to an investigation without prior notice or judicial warrant. This clause erodes due process and contravenes Article 14(1) of Ghana’s Constitution, which ensures that personal liberty can only be curtailed through lawful judicial procedure.
Human Rights Implications
- Violation of the Right to Privacy – The Bill allows the state to monitor personal messages, calls and emails. This contradicts Article 18(2) of the Constitution and international human rights conventions.
- Chilling Effect on Freedom of Expression – When individuals know that their communication may be monitored, they self-censor. This erodes Article 21(1)(a), which protects freedom of speech and expression.
- Erosion of Judicial Independence and Rule of Law – The Bill sidelines judicial oversight by empowering administrative bodies to act as investigators and enforcers.
- Disproportionate Limitation of Rights – Rights can only be limited if the restriction is reasonably necessary in a democratic society, but the Bill’s open-ended powers create conditions for mass surveillance.
International and Regional Perspectives
States must make sure that cybersecurity measures respect human rights and privacy, according to the African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection (Malabo Convention, 2014). This standard is violated by Ghana’s 2025 Amendment, which increases surveillance without providing adequate protections. The same rights that individuals have offline must be safeguarded online, according to UN Human Rights Council Resolution 68/167.
Conclusion and Recommendations
There is a paradox in the Cybersecurity Amendment Bill 2025. Although it aims to defend the country from cyberattacks, it endangers the very people it says it is protecting. The provisions pertaining to warrantless searches, data disclosure and surveillance open the door for misuse, political targeting and the degradation of civil liberties.
- Amend Section 45A and 47B to require judicial authorization before any surveillance or search.
- Establish independent oversight of the Cybersecurity Authority to ensure accountability.
- Protect whistleblowers, journalists, and activists from surveillance-based intimidation.
- Align the Bill with Articles 18, 21 and 33 of the Constitution and international human rights norms.
Digital authoritarianism must not use cybersecurity as a cover. Ghana can protect its online environment without compromising the privacy and self-respect of its people. Trust, openness and respect for human rights rather than surveillance and fear are the foundations of true national security.
Human Rights Advocate
MPhil Student, from the Centre of Human Right, Conflict and Peace Studies (UEW)
ORTSIN MESSIAH
0594469097( [email protected])
