A proposed licensing regime by Ghana’s National Information Technology Agency (NITA) risks creating legal uncertainty, discouraging innovation and weakening confidence in the country’s digital economy, according to a policy critique by technology analyst John Sitsofe Mensah of policy think tank IMANI Africa.
In an analysis of NITA’s recent attempt to extend licensing requirements to ICT professionals and technology businesses, Mensah argued that the agency lacks the legal basis to regulate individual practitioners under existing legislation and is instead relying on fee regulations to expand its authority.
The debate centers on efforts by NITA to enforce licensing and certification requirements through provisions embedded in Ghana’s Fees and Charges framework, rather than through sector-specific legislative instruments.
Mensah said the move amounts to “administrative bootstrapping,” where an agency attempts to derive substantive regulatory powers from a financial schedule designed primarily for revenue collection.
“The architecture of a nation’s digital economy relies entirely on the integrity of its regulatory frameworks,” Mensah wrote. “When regulatory bodies bypass foundational legislation in favor of administrative bootstrapping, the entire ecosystem is placed at risk.”
According to the analysis, NITA’s enabling laws, including the National Information Technology Agency Act, 2008 and the Electronic Transactions Act, 2008, were designed primarily to regulate ICT infrastructure, enterprise-level services and sensitive corporate functions such as encryption and authentication.
Mensah argued that Section 38(1) of the Electronic Transactions Act explicitly prohibits the agency from issuing licenses to individuals, creating what he described as a direct contradiction with attempts to license software developers, analysts and other ICT practitioners.
He also questioned the legal validity of using the Fees and Charges (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2022 and its accompanying regulations as the basis for expanding regulatory authority.
“A line item buried in a general fees schedule cannot override the explicit prohibition against individual licensing,” he said.
The critique comes as Ghana accelerates efforts to deepen its digital economy through expanded digital public infrastructure, electronic government services and technology-driven financial inclusion initiatives.
Mensah warned that introducing mandatory licensing for ICT professionals could create barriers to entry in a sector that traditionally relies on open competition, global certifications and skills-based hiring.
Unlike regulated professions such as law or medicine, the global technology industry operates largely through internationally recognized certifications from companies and professional bodies including Microsoft, Cisco Systems and Amazon Web Services, alongside portfolio-based assessment and open-source contributions.
The paper argues that a localized licensing system risks excluding self-taught developers and entrepreneurs who form a significant part of Africa’s technology ecosystem.
Mensah compared the proposed framework to Britain’s 19th-century “Red Flag Act,” legislation widely criticized for slowing the development of the country’s automobile industry by imposing restrictive operating requirements on early motor vehicles.
“Attempting to force the modern, decentralized IT sector into a localized, state-mandated licensing guild is the digital equivalent of the Red Flag Act,” he wrote.
Rather than introducing mandatory licensing, the analyst called for clearer statutory boundaries for regulators, greater reliance on internationally recognized technology certifications and stronger transparency requirements for state agencies overseeing the digital sector.
The debate highlights growing tensions between regulation and innovation across African technology markets as governments seek to tighten oversight of rapidly expanding digital ecosystems while avoiding policies that could deter investment and entrepreneurship.
