Constitutional Rights and Policy Strategy Advisor at Democracy Hub, Oliver Barker-Vormawor has criticised what he describes as inconsistency in the application of laws governing false publication and offensive speech in Ghana.

Speaking on JoyNews' Newsfile on Saturday, he said law enforcement agencies must apply the same standards to similar conduct, regardless of the political affiliations or perceived sympathies of the individuals involved.

“My concern, and I've spoken consistently, is our inability to be consistent in application of false publication rules and speech offending rules,” he said.

His comments follow the arrest and remand of 40-year-old senior nursing officer Salomey Awiti Bafoh over her alleged links to UK-based TikTok user Barbara Asantewaa Kodua, popularly known as “Ghana Jollof”.

Ms Bafoh was arrested at her home in Hansua, near Techiman, on September 13 and later appeared before the Adentan Circuit Court, where she pleaded not guilty to a charge of 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).

She was denied bail and remanded for two weeks, with the case adjourned to September 30.

The prosecution alleges that Ms Bafoh acted as a liaison for Ms Kodua and helped recruit others to redistribute videos produced by her.

Barker-Vormawor said while some of the content attributed to Ms Kodua may warrant investigation, similar standards should apply to other public figures who have made controversial statements online.

He questioned why individuals whose names have reportedly surfaced in connection with alleged funding of the TikTok account had not themselves been arrested if investigators had established a criminal connection.

He stressed that simply identifying financial transactions on a person's phone does not, on its own, establish that the money was provided to facilitate criminal conduct.

“You cannot go about and say things like that,” he said, arguing that investigators would have to establish a direct link between any financial support and the alleged criminal activity.

He also challenged what he described as selective enforcement of laws on offensive speech, citing public figures who have made controversial comments but have not faced similar criminal investigations.

“If one speech is deemed as unpleasant, then we must apply that stroke across the board,” he said.

According to him, the issue is not whether he agrees with the content of the speech, but whether the state is applying the law consistently.

He said the debate should therefore focus on whether particular communications cross the threshold into criminal conduct, rather than on whether the speaker's views are popular or politically aligned with the government.

Barker-Vormawor's comments come amid renewed debate over freedom of expression and the use of criminal law to regulate social media communications following Ms Bafoh's arrest.

He urged authorities and the courts to ensure that constitutional rights, including privacy and due process protections, are respected throughout investigations and prosecutions.