The Minority Caucus in Parliament has officially declared its opposition to the proposed Security and Intelligence Agencies Bill, 2025. In a formal statement released on February 18 and signed by Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, the caucus characterized the legislation as fundamentally flawed and expressed concerns that it would lead to an excessive concentration of power within the Presidency. While the Minority acknowledged the need for reforms to modernize the nation's national security framework, they maintained that the bill is unacceptable in its existing form.
The Minority Caucus has clarified that while they advocate for the modernization of Ghana's national security framework, they consider the proposed legislation fundamentally defective. According to their statement, the Bill is problematic because it centralizes disproportionate appointing authority within the Executive branch and undermines independent supervision. Furthermore, the opposition argues that the Bill grants broader surveillance powers without establishing the necessary legal protections to safeguard human rights.
The Minority Caucus has expressed significant concerns regarding the proposed bill, specifically highlighting the lack of parliamentary oversight for key security appointments. They argue that it is inappropriate for agencies with coercive power and access to sensitive national data to operate without legislative vetting.
Key Criticisms of the Proposed Legislation
Self-Regulation: The Caucus argues that placing the National Security Council chaired by the President as the governing body for intelligence agencies creates a system of "self-oversight" that lacks independent checks.
Barriers to Scrutiny: Provisions in the bill would allow security officials to withhold documents under the guise of national security without providing justifications or redacted alternatives to Parliament.
Lack of Protections: The Minority objects to the harsh criminal penalties (five to ten years) for certain disclosures, noting a total absence of explicit legal protections for whistleblowers.
Privacy Concerns: The statement describes the proposed "administrative authorization" for communication intercepts as a "deeply troubling" shift away from the principle that only courts should approve invasions of privacy.
Risk of Politicization: There are fears that the current structure of District and Regional Security Councils could lead to political interference, especially during election cycles.
Proposed Solutions
Stating that they cannot support the bill in its current form, the Minority is calling for a more balanced approach that includes:
Independent oversight mechanisms.
Judicial-only warrants for surveillance and interceptions.
Robust whistleblower protections and human rights safeguards.
Enhanced financial transparency.
The Caucus concluded by emphasizing that national security should not come at the expense of civil liberties, urging Parliament to find a balance that protects the nation without eroding the freedoms of its citizens.
Read the full statement below
