Renowned US-based Ghanaian lawyer and scholar, Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare, has called out the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Christian Tetteh Yohuno, over the arrest of New Patriotic Party (NPP) activist Daniel Adomako, popularly known as Sir Obama Pokuase.

In a series of posts shared on Facebook on August 13, 2025, Professor Kwaku Asare, who is widely known as Kwaku Azar, raised a number of issues with the NPP activist’s arrest.

Police confirm arrest of NPP's Sir Obama Pokuase

He asserted that the Ghana Police Service was not being consistent in its arrest of Sir Obama Pokuase.

“From dawn raid to ‘helping with investigation’ to arraignment — Mr IGP, the math isn’t mathing. GOGO wasn’t born yesterday,” he wrote in one of the posts.

He also questioned the nature of the arrest of the activist, saying, “Thanks for the update, police, but why the dawn arrest if Sir Obama is only assisting investigations?”

The legal luminary indicated that the arrest of the NPP supporter was unwarranted, arguing that a mere statement by people does not warrant arrests.

“In a constitutional order, arrest is not the reflexive answer to unpopular speech. The due process protections, the presumption of innocence, and the right to liberty require that security agencies act with restraint, precision, and proportionality.

“Enforcement should target only speech that is truly hateful, threatening, or inciting unlawful acts — speech that poses a tangible risk to the safety of persons or the security of the State. Disrespectful, distasteful, or crude remarks, however unpalatable, do not meet this threshold and should be countered by rebuttal, civic education, or social disapproval, not the heavy hand of arrest,” he wrote.

Two arrested for threatening President Mahama and First Lady Lordina

According to a statement signed by the Director of Public Affairs of the Police Service, ACP Grace Ansah Akrofi, Sir Obama Pokuase’s arrest is in connection with the sharing of videos and images on social media in which some individuals are openly seen brandishing illegally acquired weapons.

"The Ghana Police Service, in collaboration with other security agencies, has arrested Mr Daniel Adomako, known on social media as 'Sir Obama Pokuase', earlier today.

"His arrest is part of ongoing intelligence-led operations by the Police and other security agencies aimed at dismantling networks involved in the illegal possession and display of sophisticated weapons. He is assisting investigations into some images and videos he circulated on social media depicting individuals openly brandishing these illegally acquired sophisticated weapons," the police said.

The statement added that the operation has been ongoing for some weeks and has led to the retrieval of a substantial number of illegal arms and ammunition.

View his post below:

Nananom, Anuanom, Nnamfonom, and Yaanom:

While reading the Kevin Taylor case this morning, GOGO was struck by these words expressed by Justice Tanko Amadu.

“My Lords, before us is an application, which triggers a careful consideration of two pertinent aspects of our national lives — the adherence to the due process of law, and the respect for the authority of the court. The procedure to enforcing the latter requires adherence to the principles of the former. Ours is not a dictatorial setting but is procedurally defined, as it is underpinned by respect for the rights of all persons, including accused persons or Respondents to any process of the court alleging contempt.”

Those words resonate even more today in light of the dawn arrest of Sir-Obama, editor of Pokuase Mail, for an as-yet unspecified offence.

If one is to believe reports circulating on social media, always a hazardous proposition, the episode once again highlights a recurring challenge in our national life: the balance between safeguarding the constitutional freedoms that are the lifeblood of our democracy and protecting public order.

The principles that Justice Tanko enunciated in the Taylor case applies with equal, if not greater, force to the conduct of our police and national security agencies when confronted with speech that is offensive, unsettling, or injurious to sensibilities.

The mode of arrest is not a mere procedural nicety; it is a substantive guarantee that the coercive powers of the State are exercised only within the guardrails of law. Where there is no risk of flight, destruction of evidence, or imminent danger to the public, the preferred approach should be to invite the person to assist with investigations, rather than storming their home at dawn as if they were armed robbers or looters.

Such heavy-handed tactics, when used on mere suspects in speech-related matters, undermine public trust and create the appearance of intimidation rather than justice.

In that same case, Justice Tanko quoted an English judge who observed:

“Every sane person abuses his power from time to time, but a judge has many more opportunities of doing this than most other people. One unfair remark by one judge can bring the judiciary as a whole into disrepute, just as a few unruly and bad-mannered students can give the young people of today a bad name. In each case the percentage is tiny but the harm is done just the same.”

What is true of one judge is even more true of the police or national security. One reckless raid — one dawn storming of a home without clear justification — can bring an entire security institution into disrepute.

The percentage of such incidents may be small, but the damage to public trust is immense and lasting. In an age where images and videos travel instantly, one misjudged operation can erase years of painstaking community relations work.

In a constitutional order, arrest is not the reflexive answer to unpopular speech. The due process protections, the presumption of innocence, and the right to liberty require that security agencies act with restraint, precision, and proportionality.

Enforcement should target only speech that is truly hateful, threatening, or inciting unlawful acts — speech that poses a tangible risk to the safety of persons or the security of the State.

Disrespectful, distasteful, or crude remarks, however unpalatable, do not meet this threshold and should be countered by rebuttal, civic education, or social disapproval, not the heavy hand of arrest.

We must also acknowledge the increasing incidence of uncivil discourse in our public life. Far too many people now reach for needless insults as their first and only rhetorical tool, sometimes because they see such behaviour rewarded with attention, notoriety, or even political capital.

Much of the rich debates that we once witnessed on platforms such as Okyeame and Ghanaweb now seem to be giving way to high-sounding insults — empty of substance but loud enough to dominate the space.

This trend not only debases our national conversation but risks creating a perverse incentive structure where coarseness is a shortcut to relevance.

Hateful speech, especially when aimed at individuals or groups with hostility and prejudice, adds little of value to public discourse. It corrodes trust, deepens divisions, and distracts from the constructive exchange of ideas that strengthens democratic governance.

Civil discourse, in contrast, enriches debate, sharpens policy, and builds a culture in which disagreement is not a licence for dehumanisation.

The President is not just an old Vandal who treasures free speech; he is also a media man who has, time without number, highlighted the importance of allowing free expression.

National Security must take a cue from His Excellency: the State’s coercive power should not be the instrument for settling scores over words that offend, but the shield that protects lawful expression, even when it stings.

A society committed to these ideals must be willing to ostracise those whose only weapon is insult, while preserving the dignity of individuals and the integrity of our national conversation.

Security agencies must act not as arbiters of taste but as guardians of constitutional order — intervening only when speech crosses the legal line into criminality, and doing so with procedures that respect the rights of all, including the most intemperate speaker. That is the true measure of a free society.







BAI/VPO

Meanwhile, watch the trailer to GhanaWeb’s yet-to-air documentary on teenage girls and how fish is stealing their futures below: