Civil society organization Democracy Hub has filed a writ at the Supreme Court of Ghana challenging what it calls an “unconstitutional and illegal” Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Government of Ghana and the United States of America for the reception and detention of deported West African nationals.
The group argues that the MoU — which purportedly allows the U.S. to transfer third-country nationals into Ghana for temporary detention and onward deportation — breaches Ghana’s Constitution and violates key international human rights conventions.
The Supreme Court has scheduled Wednesday, October 22, 2025, to hear an interlocutory injunction application seeking to suspend the implementation of the agreement until the substantive case is determined.
Secret Deal and Alleged Detentions
According to Democracy Hub, Foreign Affairs Minister Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa disclosed in September that Ghana had reached an understanding with the U.S. to receive and hold deported West African nationals from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities.
The alleged arrangement was reportedly part of negotiations aimed at lifting U.S. visa sanctions imposed on Ghana.
Since the deal took effect, the group claims that 42 individuals have already been repatriated in three separate batches — on September 6, September 19, and October 13, 2025 — and are currently being detained under military guard at the Bundase Military Training Camp.
Democracy Hub further alleges that the detainees are being kept in “deplorable conditions for weeks without charge, access to lawyers, or basic human rights.”
Filed under Articles 2(1)(b) and 130(1) of the 1992 Constitution, the writ seeks 28 distinct reliefs from the Supreme Court. The challenge is based on four principal grounds:
-
Lack of Parliamentary Approval:
The MoU was not presented to Parliament for ratification as mandated by Article 75(2) of the Constitution. -
Violation of International Law:
The agreement contravenes Ghana’s obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention, the Convention Against Torture, and the OAU Refugee Convention, all of which prohibit returning individuals to countries where they may face persecution — a principle known as non-refoulement. -
Human Rights Violations:
The detention of civilians and asylum-seekers under military custody allegedly breaches Articles 14, 15, and 19 of the Constitution, which protect the rights to liberty, dignity, and a fair trial. -
Complicity in “Chain Refoulement”:
By enabling the transfer of individuals who might face persecution elsewhere, Ghana is said to be aiding “chain refoulement,” a severe violation of binding international norms.
In a statement accompanying the suit, Democracy Hub insisted that no administration has the authority to “secretly contract Ghana out of its constitutional and human rights obligations.”
“The Constitution demands transparency, parliamentary oversight, and respect for human dignity in all matters of international cooperation,” the group said.
“This case is not only about the affected individuals but about protecting Ghana’s democratic integrity and reputation as a rule-of-law state.”
If the Supreme Court upholds the suit, it could set a landmark precedent governing how Ghana negotiates and ratifies international agreements involving security, migration, and human rights cooperation.
