CUTS International is raising concerns over the prolonged delays in the passage of Ghana’s Competition Bill, which is gathering dust 20 years after it was drafted.
Two major laws were drafted in 2005 with the goal of shaping Ghana’s markets and protecting consumers. The competition law was drafted in 2005, in addition to the National Petroleum Authority Act (Act 691).
Two decades later, their journeys could not be more different. This year, the NPA proudly celebrates 20 years of active operations, regulatory impact, and institutional growth.
But same cannot be said of the Competition Bill, drafted at the very same time, is marking 20 years of gathering dust on a desk at the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MOTI).
In a press release copied to The High Street Journal, the West African Regional Director of CUTS International, Appiah Kusi Adomako, says the contrast is not only striking, but it is also costly.
How One Became Law – and the Other Never Moved
Act 691 was passed and quickly became one of the most powerful sector regulators in Ghana. Over two decades, it has overseen pricing, licensing, consumer protection within the petroleum sector, and enforcement of rules under a clear legal mandate.
Meanwhile, the Consumer Protection and Competition Bills, conceived in the same year, meant to protect the everyday Ghanaian and ensure fair market conduct, have remained untouched.
“The draft Consumer Protection and Competition bill and the National Petroleum Bill were both prepared at the same time in 2005. The same year, in 2005, Parliament passed the NPA 691. This year, the NPA marked its 20th anniversary. That of the Consumer Protection Bill also celebrates 20 years of gathering dust at the mahogany desk at the MOTI,” Lawyer Appiah Kusi Adomako recounted.
The Human Cost of a Law Left Behind
CUTS International observes that the prolonged delay no longer serves the public interest. While the bill gathers dust, consumers are unprotected, and markets operate without discipline.
The competition economists and a lawyer further argued that the absence of a comprehensive consumer protection and competition framework means daily struggles for ordinary people.
He notes that consumers receive misleading information or buy substandard goods with little recourse. He adds that trade associations fix prices, hurting competition and raising costs.
Moreover, dominant firms dictate market terms, squeezing out smaller businesses. Mobile money users, he adds, battle unresolved reversals, health patients encounter unsafe practices, and buyers face expired products.
However, he notes that “A mother buying food products should trust labels. A patient visiting a clinic should feel safe. A mobile money user should not beg for a reversal when systems fail. Rights must work in practice and not remain theoretical.”
The Market Consequences
Aside from the human impact, CUTS International further argues that the absence of a competition law has also created distortions in the market.
Price-fixing cartels operate freely outside the petroleum sector, and anti-competitive behaviour goes unpunished.
Mergers risk creating giants with unchecked power, and innovation and fair pricing suffer.
Yet, under the AfCFTA Competition Protocol, Ghana is obligated to have a competition law and an enforcement body.
“When associations set prices, competition dies. When dominant firms dictate terms, small businesses shrink. When competitors fix quantities, the market suffers. We need rules and we need enforcement,” the statement further added.
A Tale of Two Laws: Why the Difference Matters
The NPA Act’s 20-year milestone shows what happens when a regulatory framework is given proper legal backing: institutions grow, standards rise, and citizens benefit.
The Competition Bill’s 20-year paralysis shows the exact opposite of a system where fragmented laws, sector silos, and policy inertia leave consumers and businesses vulnerable.
As observed by CUT International, one law shaped a whole sector. The other could shape the entire marketplace, if only it were passed.
The policy think tank says Ghana cannot continue celebrating the success of one 2005 law while ignoring the long, costly absence of the others drafted alongside it.
