The Minister for Communications, Digital Technology and Innovations, Samuel Nartey George, has defended provisions of the National Information Technology Authority (NITA) Bill, 2025, describing recent public criticisms of the draft law as “misleading” and based on “misrepresentation and falsehood.”
In a detailed Facebook post responding to concerns raised by a commentator, Jay Kwashie, the Minister addressed 11 separate claims about the Bill, ranging from presidential appointments and ministerial directives to data sovereignty, artificial intelligence governance, and penalties for non-compliance.
He rejected allegations that the president would have excessive control over appointments under the Bill, insisting that the claim was inaccurate.
“The President, in consultation with the Minister, directly appoints 4 of the 13 Board members,” he explained, adding that the remaining members would come from institutional and industry representation.
“The proposed appointment regime is similar to what exists today and is used by several regulators, and it is consistent with articles 70 and 195 of the 1992 Constitution… Your claim that one man appoints everyone is FALSE,” he stated.
On concerns that ministerial directives undermine the independence of the proposed Authority, the Communications Minister maintained that policy direction is a standard function of government.
“Policy Direction is a primary duty of every Minister, and that responsibility CANNOT be relinquished to a Board,” he wrote, adding that NITA is an agency of the Ministry.
“No one has claimed that the Authority is Independent. NITA is an Agency of the Ministry and has never been portrayed as Independent,” he stressed.
On fears that Section 37 of the Bill could restrict foreign participation in Ghana’s ICT sector, the communications, Digital Technology and Innovations Minister clarified that the intention was not to exclude global technology companies.
“There is a clear intent on the part of the Ministry to grow and protect certain parts of the technical services sector for indigenous Ghanaian entities. The intent is NOT to exclude ‘big tech’,” he explained, adding that government seeks to “proactively protect Ghanaian technology firms in certain areas to build local capacity and competence.”
Responding to concerns over a potential conflict of interest involving a state-owned ICT company, Sam George rejected claims that the arrangement would undermine regulation, arguing that the reforms are meant to separate infrastructure management from regulation.
He said government already operates ICT infrastructure such as fibre networks and data centres and that the proposed Bill seeks to address an existing anomaly.
On provisions requiring certification of ICT professionals, the Communications Minister defended the measure as necessary for quality assurance.
“How is this problematic? You expect us to allow an unregulated service provider regime in 2026?” he asked, comparing it to licensing regimes for other professions.
Addressing claims that a tribunal would lack independence due to its funding structure, he cited the existing Electronic Communications Tribunal and said it had demonstrated independence despite being funded by the regulator.
“Over 80% of rulings have been against the NCA since its setup,” he stated.
On data protection concerns, the communications Minister said Ghana already has strong safeguards under existing legislation and argued there is no need to duplicate provisions across laws.
He added that cybersecurity matters fall under the Cyber Security Authority, which already regulates breach reporting and response mechanisms.
On artificial intelligence governance, Sam George said a separate Emerging Technologies Bill is being developed.
“The Ministry has prepared an Emerging Technologies Bill that covers all the issues you raise and more,” he stated.
He also dismissed concerns that administrative penalties under the Bill would be too harsh for startups, describing such claims as “mere conjecture,” and said sanctions would be applied with discretion.
On claims of drafting errors, he clarified that the issues referenced were contained in a “zero draft” and would be corrected during parliamentary processes.
“Typos are not fatal,” he said.
He further dismissed suggestions that the Bill is already before Parliament, stating: “Let me be clear about one thing: you claim that Parliament is about to pass the Bill. That is respectfully, a BIG FAT LIE!”
He added that the process is still at Cabinet memorandum stage and that “there is NO SUCH BILL before Parliament.”
