The detention of Kwame Baffoe Abronye, widely known as Abronye DC and the Bono Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), has drawn significant criticism from prominent figures within the party, who assert that the legal proceedings undermine fundamental principles of free speech, due process, and democratic governance in Ghana. Abronye DC was initially remanded into police custody for two weeks over ongoing investigations into alleged misinformation and offensive public comments, a decision that has since sparked a broader debate on judicial independence and the fair application of the law.

Dr. Bernard Okoe-Boye, a former Minister of Health, vehemently criticized the detention, describing it as a direct affront to free speech and democratic tolerance. Speaking on Asempa FM’s Ekosii Sen show, Dr. Okoe-Boye acknowledged his disapproval of Abronye’s communication style but emphasized that democratic societies must accommodate a wide spectrum of opinions and expressions. He cautioned against conflating legitimate criticism of a judge’s ruling with personal attacks on a judge, stressing the need for careful handling of such delicate matters.

Furthermore, Dr. Okoe-Boye raised serious concerns regarding the involvement of the Judicial Secretary in filing the complaint against Abronye. He argued that since the Judicial Secretary oversees the administrative functions of the judiciary, a complaint originating from this office, when placed before a judge, indirectly implicates the Chief Justice and the broader Judicial Secretariat. This, he suggested, could create an undue influence on the judicial process. Dr. Okoe-Boye proposed that a civil defamation suit filed by the aggrieved judge would have been a more appropriate and less politically charged recourse, questioning the use of what he termed “government law” in the matter.

He also warned of the potential damage such developments could inflict upon Ghana’s democratic image on the international stage. Dr. Okoe-Boye articulated that reports of a citizen being imprisoned for expressing critical views, rather than attempting physical harm, would portray Ghana as a country with a rigid atmosphere and suppressed freedom of speech. He urged the National Democratic Congress (NDC) to take notice, emphasizing that such perceptions could negatively impact the nation's standing. Additionally, he questioned the presence of "double standards" and a lack of integrity in the country’s approach to issues concerning free speech and accountability.

Echoing these sentiments, Justin Frimpong Kodua, the General Secretary of the New Patriotic Party, called for strict adherence to fairness in the application of the law, asserting that legal procedures must remain uninfluenced by political considerations. Speaking on Joy FM's Top Story, Mr. Kodua clarified that while the NPP is not opposed to its members being investigated or invited by authorities, the party rigorously insists that due process must be meticulously followed at all times. He underscored the NPP’s consistent belief that the law should be applied equally to all citizens, irrespective of their political affiliations.

Mr. Kodua accused the current administration of the National Democratic Congress of applying the law selectively, alleging that certain individuals are being targeted because of their criticisms of the government or their divergent political stances. He maintained that legal processes should operate strictly within the constitutional framework and established legal standards, rather than being exploited as political instruments against opponents. His concerns extended to the role of the judiciary, prompting him to call upon the Judicial Council of Ghana to ensure that judicial officers uphold professional standards and steadfastly maintain their independence.

Critiquing the decision to remand Abronye, Mr. Kodua characterized the ruling as both troubling and inconsistent with established legal principles. He specifically questioned the rationale behind remanding an individual for four weeks based solely on the prosecution's allegation that they might commit similar offenses, especially in the absence of any prior conviction. He argued that such a decision sets a dangerous precedent, potentially leading to prolonged detentions on unproven allegations if cases extend over several months. Mr. Kodua warned that if judges are perceived to be acting along political lines, public trust in the judiciary could be significantly eroded, reiterating the imperative for judges to remain neutral and operate strictly within their professional and constitutional limits.