Home Politics Mahama Urged to Pardon Camilla Alhassan to Protect Free Speech

Mahama Urged to Pardon Camilla Alhassan to Protect Free Speech

7
0

The Media Research Institute (MRI) has called on President John Dramani Mahama to grant a presidential pardon to TikToker Camilla Alhassan, describing her one-year jail sentence for offensive conduct and publication of false news as excessive.

The request follows the Accra Circuit Court’s decision to sentence Camilla Alhassan to one year in prison after she pleaded guilty to charges relating to comments and publications deemed offensive and false.

In a statement issued on Friday, July 17, 2026, the MRI argued that although Camilla’s conduct was unacceptable, the punishment handed to her was disproportionate and could have negative implications for freedom of expression.

The institute urged President Mahama to exercise his constitutional powers to grant her a pardon, citing the 2016 pardon granted to the “Montie Three,” who were sentenced to prison for contempt of court. According to the MRI, such a decision would help address concerns about fairness in the enforcement of laws relating to free speech and political expression.

“While the comments and actions of Camilla are despicable by all standards, the one-year jail term is tantamount to killing an ant with a sledgehammer. The Media Research Institute (MRI), therefore, calls on President John Dramani Mahama to, as he did in the case of the ‘Montie Three’, exercise his right to pardon to free Camilla and help restore some credibility to political activism in the country,” the statement read.

The group said the case raises questions about selective law enforcement, particularly when compared with instances where politicians have made controversial remarks without facing similar legal consequences.

The MRI referenced past comments by political figures, including allegations and attacks involving public officials, to argue that individuals with political influence often escape punishment for statements that could also be considered offensive or inflammatory.

“In May this year, the Minority Leader of Parliament, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, threw wild vituperations at a Circuit Court Judge, in what was generally believed to be a brazen assault on the sanctity of the court. He described the judge in question as an ‘NDC Judge’ who should be ‘ashamed of himself’.

“The GBA rightly condemned his conduct, expressing disappointment in him for acting ‘unprofessionally and unethically’. Yet, he walked free and was never cited for contempt or offensive conduct.

“In another instance in early September 2024, Malik Basintale, then a Deputy National Communication Officer of the NDC, alleged that pork was the favorite meat of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, who is a Muslim. Indeed, it is common knowledge that Muslims don’t eat pork, and such allegations, which border on religious beliefs, can be very sensitive issues.

“Malik Basintale’s allegation came after Mr. Atta Akyea, a respected lawyer and former Minister, urged the electorate in late August 2024 to vote for Dr. Bawumia, a ‘distinguished economist’ who does not drink alcohol, rather than voting for a ‘drunkard’. Nobody was arrested, prosecuted, or sentenced for such reckless allegations,” the MRI noted.

The institute maintained that while there is a need to promote responsible speech and civility in public discourse, punitive measures must not be applied in a manner that threatens democratic freedoms.

It further called on government institutions, including the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE), civil society groups, and faith-based organizations, to intensify public education on responsible communication.

The MRI also appealed to political parties and leaders to encourage their supporters to engage in respectful conversations, especially on social media, warning that reckless expression could deepen political divisions.

The group stressed that while freedom of speech must be exercised alongside responsibility, it cautioned against what it described as the criminalization of speech among ordinary citizens, arguing that powerful individuals appear to avoid similar consequences.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here