As the drama unfolds between the Minister for Communications and MultiChoice Ghana, operators of DSTV, over demands for price cut, public policy think tank IMANI Africa is asking a critical question, “Where exactly is the Minister for Communications drawing his power from to issue such a directive?”
IMANI is challenging the legal basis for the Minister’s intervention in the market of the PayTV in the country.
Speaking on Channel One TV’s The Point of View, Amprofi Agyemang, a Senior Research Associate at IMANI, argued that the applicable law in this context is the Electronic Communications Act, Act 775.
He notes that a careful look at the Act reveals that it does say that one of the grounds for revoking a broadcasting licence is failure to follow a lawful directive from the NCA, which is the industry regulator.
He adds that IMANI did not find any provision in the Act that suggests that failure to comply with a Minister’s directive can warrant a revocation of a broadcasting licence. IMANI is therefore challenging the legal basis for the Minister’s intervention, calling it a grey area that exposes deeper regulatory and legal gaps in Ghana’s market governance framework.
“When the directive came from the minister, we were demanding to know where he was really drawing his power from. When you look at the Electronic Communication Act, I think 775, 13B, I think, it says that the one of the elements or one of the things that can trigger revocation of the broadcasting licence is the fact that you, as the supplier of any sort of service, you did not follow lawful directive from the NCA,” he explained.
He continued, “I wanted to really delve deep and look into which other powers are in these sections that the minister sort of is drawing his directive from. And we didn’t really find anything. So the question is, is this lawful?”
Public Sentiment Is Not Legal Authority
While acknowledging that many Ghanaians are burdened by high pay-TV prices and frustrated by the lack of competition in the space, Amprofi Agyemang stressed that policy directives must be grounded in law, not merely public outcry.
This, IMANI says, raises questions not just about the legality of the Minister’s call for price reductions, but also about the governance structure within which such market decisions are made.
“What is the research behind this? It is just out of public demand for the services of DSTV, and they’re feeling that, by virtue of the fact that the cedi has appreciated against the dollar, there should be some sort of benefit to it, but no really hardcore evidence to support that?” he noted.
No Competition Law, No Clear Boundaries
The IMANI Africa Research Associate further asserted that the situation underscores the long-standing void in Ghana’s economic policy framework, which is the absence of a Competition Law.
The lack of such a law means there is no independent body mandated to monitor and regulate monopolistic behavior, investigate anti-competitive practices, and mediate pricing disputes in liberal markets.
“That is why we need to really visit the whole idea of a competition law, which we don’t have. And for two decades, that has stalled. If there were a competition law, with a competition sort of agency, board, really delving into some of these nitty-gritty of some of these issues,” he reasoned.
The Bottom Line
While the Minister’s push for MultiChoice to reduce prices has gained popular support, IMANI is warning that even well-intended interventions must be grounded in clear legal authority.
Without it, Ghana risks creating policy precedents that muddy the line between law, politics, and economic freedom.
Until a robust competition framework is in place, excessive governmental or ministerial intervention will continue to create tension and militate against the principle of free market.
