BY Daniel Bampoe
The controversy surrounding the National Democratic Congress government decision to accept deportees from the United States has escalated sharply, with the Minority in Parliament accusing the government of breaching constitutional procedures and failing to provide full disclosure on the humanitarian arrangement.
The issue, which has been simmering since the first batch of 14 African deportees arrived in early September, resurfaced forcefully this week after an additional 40 were brought into the country under what government describes as a “non-binding memorandum of understanding (MoU).”
A Growing Diplomatic Storm
The matter first gained public attention in September 2025 when the Foreign Affairs Minister, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, announced that Ghana had agreed to temporarily host African nationals deported from the U.S., mainly from the ECOWAS sub-region.
The NDC Government justified the move on humanitarian grounds, citing inhumane conditions faced by deportees abroad and the long-standing leadership role in Pan-African solidarity.
However, the Minority immediately raised concerns over the constitutional implications of the decision.
They argued that the arrangement resembled international cooperation requiring parliamentary scrutiny under Article 75 of the Constitution—similar to the 2016 case of the controversial transfer of the two Guantanamo Bay detainees, which was later ruled by the Supreme Court to require parliamentary approval.
Simultaneously, public suspicion grew when the U.S. reversed restrictive visa sanctions on Ghana shortly after the agreement.
The sanctions had slashed five-year multiple-entry visas down to three-month single-entry permits, affecting thousands of travellers and businesses.
Minority Questions “Hidden Concessions”
The Minority’s strongest line of attack concerns whether the visa restoration was tied to the willingness to accept deportees—including non-Ghanaian West Africans.
The Second Minority Whip, Habib Iddrisu, demanded on the floor of Parliament that the Minister for Foreign Affairs be compelled to provide a detailed briefing.
“We need to know the reasons associated with the reversal. Is it tied to Ghana accepting the deportees into the country?” he asked, casting doubt on government’s motives.
Habib Iddrisu warned that Ghana may have entered into a diplomatic concession without public transparency, stressing the precedent set by the Gitmo Two case—a reminder that any agreement involving foreign nationals’ entry into Ghana must be subjected to constitutional checks.
Government Defends Position: “It Is Not a Treaty”
Appearing before Parliament on November 19, Minister Ablakwa insisted that no law was breached because the arrangement with the United States is based on a non-binding MoU, which he said requires no parliamentary ratification.
“If we were to bring MoUs—which are not legally binding—to Parliament, it would be impractical,” he said, explaining that the Foreign Affairs Ministry signs dozens of such documents weekly as part of routine diplomatic work.
He further clarified that the Attorney General had confirmed that the MoU does not qualify as a treaty or agreement under Article 75.
Okudzeto Ablakwa also revealed that citizen activist Oliver Barker-Vormawor has filed a lawsuit on the matter, cautioning MPs to be mindful in their public comments while the case is pending.
Majority Leader Backs Minister, Cites ECOWAS Protocol
Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga defended the government robustly, dismissing claims that accepting third-country nationals required any special agreement.
According to him, the ECOWAS Protocol on Free Movement already grants West African citizens the right to enter Ghana visa-free for up to 90 days.
“I clearly know citizen of ECOWAS has the right to sit in an aircraft, disembark in Ghana and continue to their countries,” he argued, describing the deportee reception as merely a “natural consequence” of existing regional law.
Mahama Ayariga also praised the Foreign Affairs Minister for securing the reversal of U.S. visa sanctions, calling it a major diplomatic victory with significant economic benefits.
Humanitarian Argument Still Central To Government’s Case
Throughout the debate, the government has maintained that its decision is anchored in humanitarian concern, not political trade-offs.
Okudzeto Ablakwa noted earlier in September that Ghana stepped in after witnessing harsh treatment of Africans being held in U.S. detention facilities.
“We’re doing this because we want to continue to position Ghana as the Mecca for Africans,” he said in an earlier interview on Channel One TV.
Government insists it has not received any financial benefit from the arrangement.
Minority Demands Not Met—Yet
Despite the Majority’s defence, the Minority remains unsatisfied.
They insist that the Foreign Affairs Minister must be formally compelled to disclose the full nature of the understanding with the U.S.
They are now considering filing an urgent question to force a parliamentary briefing.
