Exactly one year ago today—the Supreme Court of Ghana issued a groundbreaking ruling that would echo far beyond its borders: a ban on celebrities from advertising and endorsing alcoholic beverages. The blockbuster ruling came after music manager Mark Darlington Osae filed a complaint against Ghana’s Food and Drugs Authority (FDA). The court’s decision has been celebrated by public health advocates as a giant step in protecting Ghanaian youth from harmful products. However, its effects have unleashed a tsunami of concerns within the creative industry and among businesses across the West African nation.
Public Health Priority vs. Economic Impact
The 5-2 majority decision of the Supreme Court upheld the FDA’s directive, first issued in 2015, which was meant to regulate the use of alcohol among Ghanaians. But, aspects of its guidelines prevent celebrities from advertising alcoholic beverages.
The Ghanaian Supreme Court’s point of view was clear: the interest of the people—especially the protection of children—takes precedence over economic interests. The judges, referencing Article 296 of the Constitution of Ghana and the Public Health Act, ruled that the FDA’s authority to make regulations “necessary for the protection of public health” was paramount. Upholding the appellate court’s decision, the Court of Justice viewed the directive as a necessary and proportionate measure of pursuing a legitimate objective for public health.
For public health advocates, the Supreme Court’s ruling was a huge victory. Labram Musah, a National Coordinator of the Ghana NCD Alliance, noted that “the decision underscores the critical need to protect young people from the predatory tactics of the alcohol industry.”
Impact on Creative Industry and Businesses
In today’s interconnected and technologically advanced world, Ghana’s creative industry sees this ruling as extremely disturbing and alarming. The plaintiff, Mr. Osae, maintained that the FDA’s ban was discriminatory, unconstitutional, and violated the economic rights of celebrities. He argued that it would have been a different story if it had been a full ban on all alcohol advertising. But to penalize just one demographic group without having “proper empirical data to support rationale” was not fair. The majority of industry players share this sentiment, pointing to the potential loss of revenue to Ghanaian celebrities, especially those whose influencer deals are a significant portion of their earnings in a growing economy.
Popular Ghanaian musician Mzbel expressed her frustration about the court ruling, calling out the hypocrisy of allowing bars and alcohol commercials in public spaces while questioning why celebrities, the supposed “role models,” are banned.
Afro-pop diva Wiyaala pushed for more specific regulations rather than the “blanket ban,” encouraging the FDA to collaborate with celebrities and influencers to find a middle ground. This sentiment is indicative of a greater concern that the ban is stifling important, legitimate business opportunities and threatening the income of musicians who often rely on endorsement deals.
As Rufftown Records CEO Bullet succinctly put it, “everybody is supposed to eat so you cannot sit at your office and come out with a law that will stop a Ghanaian from eating.” This shows the ongoing tension between promoting economic development in the creative industry and public health policy, a common challenge for governments across the board.
Mixed Public Sentiment
Public opinion in Ghana is divided. While most people don’t approve of targeted bans, the majority support the ban and its goal of protecting children, understanding the great influence that celebrities have on kids.
Public health advocates make the case that if the ban is effective in reducing underage drinking rates and its associated harms, then it is worth the cost, especially since alcohol abuse among Ghanaian youth is on the rise. Many others expressed sympathy toward celebrities and have demanded a more inclusive approach. They suggest recruiting celebrities to work on responsible drinking campaigns, instead of banning them altogether. A few take it even further, stressing how crucial parental oversight is when it comes to teaching these children personal responsibility.
Through it all, the FDA’s stance on this national travesty has been resolute and clear.Its mandate, as it has been established under the Public Health Act, extends beyond food and drug safety to more general public health ramifications. FDA’s then Director of Legal Affairs, Joseph Yaw Bernie Bennie, clarified, then, that the directive was not an arbitrary decision, but a data-driven policy in accordance with international best practice.
The Ministry of Health has made clear that It is certainly not the FDA’s intention to undermine the alcohol industry, but to support the industry responsible for protecting Ghanaians—particularly the most vulnerable—at a greater risk to public health.
International Perspectives
Ghana’s courageous alcohol ad ban is in sharp contrast to a patchwork of alcohol advertising controls around the world. It showcases an even deeper international discussion on whether regulating public health risks should take precedence over protecting economic freedoms.
Globally, alcohol advertising regulations vary tremendously. While some countries like the United States and United Kingdom rely on industry self-regulation under the conditions of responsible advertising codes. Others, such as France and Norway, have implemented stricter bans on alcohol advertising. In Asia, South Korea has chosen to ‘deglorify’ alcohol by banning celebrity images on labels, while the Middle East tends to impose blanket bans on the basis of religion and culture.
In Africa as a whole, the picture is similarly mixed, despite the fact that the majority of countries are still struggling with enforcement and lack robust, sweeping laws. Ghana’s proactive approach may not be seen as perfect, but it can certainly be inspirational for other African countries.
This, as they face increasing rates of alcohol consumption and the widespread impact of social media and celebrity culture on young people. Kenya, for instance, has similarly been drafting tougher alcohol advertising legislation as part of its public health agenda.
The Path Forward
Ghana’s Supreme Court ruling demonstrates a notable trend in the otherwise global tension between commercial interests and public health requirements. The court’s landmark ruling, grounded in both the protection of its youth, aligns with World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for complete prohibitions on alcohol advertising. This very much puts Ghana in line with those countries, prioritizing public health and social well-being over absolute corporate freedoms.
This past year has indeed marked the tone of a more critical dialog in Ghana about responsible advertising and the use of celebrities. It’s now on the government of Ghana and its regulatory agencies to not only determine how to enforce this ban effectively, but how to do so in partnership with the FDA, creative and business communities. Together, stakeholders—from sponsors, to professional practitioners, to grassroots advocates—can explore innovative ways forward with more integrated revenue streams and marketing strategies that align with the new legal landscape.
That can be accomplished through an equal measure of regulatory firmness and entrepreneurial vision. Only time and the creative and collective activism of civil society will tell how deep and wide the Supreme Court’s blockbuster ruling extends to Ghanaian youth in the months and years ahead. Ghana’s experience can definitely provide a compelling case study for other countries navigating similar tensions between their economic ambitions and protecting the public’s health.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
