Jollof Justice Erupts in Ghana: Legal Battle Exposes Selective Enforcement and Rights Concerns

The arrest and two-week remand of senior nursing officer Salomey Awiti Bafoh, aged 40, over her alleged links to the “Ghana Jollof” TikTok account, has ignited a significant debate in Ghana regarding the selective application of laws on false publications and the protection of constitutional rights. Ms. Bafoh was arrested on September 13 at her home in Hansua, near Techiman, and subsequently appeared before the Adentan Circuit Court. She pleaded not guilty to abetment of crime, specifically the alleged publication and circulation of false news under Sections 20(1) and 208 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29). The court denied her bail, remanding her for two weeks, with the case adjourned to September 30.

The prosecution alleges that Ms. Bafoh acted as a liaison for UK-based TikTok user Barbara Asantewaa Kodua, popularly known as “Ghana Jollof,” and aided in recruiting others to redistribute videos produced by Kodua. These videos allegedly contained inflammatory statements capable of provoking violence. However, it is crucial to note that these claims remain allegations and have not yet been established by the court. The case has drawn criticism from prominent figures, including Member of Parliament for Assin South, Rev. John Ntim Fordjour; Programmes Officer at CDD-Ghana, Vera Abena Addo; and Constitutional Rights and Policy Strategy Advisor at Democracy Hub, Oliver Barker-Vormawor.

Rev. John Ntim Fordjour has vociferously accused the government of applying Ghana’s laws on false publications selectively, highlighting the handling of Ms. Bafoh’s case as evidence of unequal application of the law across the political spectrum. Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile, he questioned why the police would publicly display a video associated with Ms. Bafoh's alleged activities while, in his view, failing to apply similar scrutiny to other prominent online commentators like US-based Ghanaian commentator Kevin Taylor and other unnamed individuals perceived to be favorable towards the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC). He specifically asked whether Section 208 of the Criminal Offences Act applies only to members of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) or critics of the government, emphasizing that enforcement should be consistent, regardless of political affiliation. Furthermore, Rev. Ntim Fordjour expressed grave concern over the manner of Ms. Bafoh's arrest, describing her as a mother of four young children who was reportedly “abducted” from her home 400 kilometers away in the Bono East Region and brought to Accra, allegedly denied access to her lawyers during aspects of her detention. He called upon religious leaders, professional bodies, journalists, and traditional leaders to speak out against this perceived unequal application of the law, stressing the importance of constitutional equality over partisan politics.

Vera Abena Addo of CDD-Ghana echoed concerns about public confidence in Ghana’s police service and the justice system. She noted that the police and courts are key institutions for ordinary citizens, making public trust paramount. Ms. Addo criticized the continued use of remand as a form of punishment before cases are determined, particularly in instances involving political speech. She warned that the handling of such cases could set dangerous precedents for future governments and citizens, urging the justice system to exercise extreme caution. She also voiced frustration over conflicting accounts surrounding the “Ghana Jollof” case, suggesting that authorities' communication methods leave the public uncertain. While acknowledging that the police might have a genuine case, she argued that public support would be greater if the process were transparent and evidence clearly established. Ms. Addo also questioned the two-week remand of a mother of four, particularly an essential worker, stating it “doesn't really sit well.” She called for greater institutional accountability and fairness, insisting that individual rights should not be dependent on political affiliation or access to power.

Oliver Barker-Vormawor, a private legal practitioner and Constitutional Rights and Policy Strategy Advisor at Democracy Hub, urged for a clear distinction between criminal speech and online content that is merely offensive or displeasing. He argued that law enforcement must exercise restraint and not every offensive statement should trigger police powers. While acknowledging the state's legitimate interest in investigating potentially criminal online content, Mr. Barker-Vormawor demanded that authorities clearly identify where the alleged criminality lies, particularly given Ms. Bafoh’s role as a regular online commentator. He questioned inconsistencies in police communication, such as describing UK-based Ms. Kodua as “suspected to be hiding” after investigations confirmed her location. He strongly rejected the notion that criticism of the police's approach equates to supporting the controversial content, stressing that the debate is about the appropriate use of law enforcement powers within a constitutional framework.

Mr. Barker-Vormawor further criticized the selective enforcement of laws, questioning why alleged “high-profile” sponsors of the “Ghana Jollof” activities, purportedly identified through forensic analysis of mobile money transactions, had not been arrested. He argued that financial transactions alone are insufficient to establish criminal conduct without a direct link to the alleged offences. He emphasized the need for consistent application of legal standards regardless of political affiliations or perceived sympathies. Drawing from his own experiences, he also raised concerns about how law enforcement agencies obtain and examine digital evidence, such as mobile phones and money records, advocating for strict judicial oversight to protect constitutional privacy rights. He questioned the decision to deny Ms. Bafoh bail and stressed that constitutional safeguards governing detention periods must be strictly observed, urging courts to address any alleged violations of a suspect's rights rather than treating them as incidental. For Mr. Barker-Vormawor, the “Ghana Jollof” case highlights a broader national discussion: how Ghana balances legitimate law enforcement interests with fundamental rights like freedom of expression, privacy, and the rights of persons accused of crimes. He noted that the Ghana Bar Association has also called for constitutional protections, including the presumption of innocence and proportionate bail conditions, to be respected.