A tragedy unfolded yesterday in Nyinahin that exemplifies how outdated legislation and unchecked military authority continue to threaten civilian lives in Ghana. Akwasi Lala, a young man participating in a funeral procession, was confronted by armed soldiers for wearing camouflage-patterned clothing. What followed was not an arrest —it was an execution. Akwasi was murdered, shot in the head.
Let us be absolutely clear: this was not law enforcement. This was not maintaining discipline. This was the extrajudicial killing of a Ghanaian citizen by uniformed personnel sworn to protect their countrymen.
The military justifies its aggressive stance against civilian-worn camouflage by citing the Restriction On Use Of Military Uniforms And Equipment Act of 1967 (NLCD 177)—a decree enacted during military rule that remains enshrined in our legal code under Article 11 of the 1992 Constitution. This legislation is a relic of a different era, fundamentally incompatible with contemporary society where military-inspired fashion has become common.
Our constitution strictly limits the circumstances under which a person’s life may be taken legally:
– Following a court-ordered execution
– During legitimate acts of war
– In reasonable self-defence or defence of property
– To reasonably effect an arrest
– To reasonably suppress a riot, insurrection, or mutiny
Nowhere in these provisions—or in NLCD 177 itself—is summary execution authorized for wearing camouflage patterns. The law explicitly states that violations carry “a fine not exceeding five hundred new cedis or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or both.”
The disconnect between this prescribed penalty and Akwasi’s fate is both shocking and revealing.
As Lord Bingham wisely observed,
“If anyone is to be penalized, it must not be for breaking some rule dreamt up by an ingenious minister or official in order to convict us. It must be for a proven breach of the established law of the land.” I would add that the punishment must also be proportionate and stipulated by that law.
There is a crucial distinction between impersonating military personnel—a legitimate concern—and simply wearing military-inspired fashion. The inability or unwillingness of our armed forces to recognize this distinction has now resulted in death. This represents a fundamental breakdown in the rule of law and reflects a dangerous culture of impunity that has been allowed to flourish under the protection of outdated legislation.
Justice demands immediate action. The entire squadron involved must be suspended pending investigation. Public hearings must be held to examine not only this specific incident but the broader pattern of military overreach it represents. The family of Akwasi Lala deserves both compensation and the dignity of seeing those responsible held accountable.
Most importantly, NLCD 177 must be explicitly repealed. Its continued existence enables precisely the kind of overreach that ended Akwasi’s life. Modern Ghana needs modern laws that protect civilian rights while addressing legitimate security concerns—not colonial-era decrees that empower uniformed men to act as judge, jury, and executioner over matters as trivial as clothing choices.
Akwasi Lala’s death represents not just a personal tragedy but a national failure. It is time to ensure that his memory catalyzes the reforms needed to prevent such senseless violence from occurring again.
Yaw Nkansah Abankroh Esq.
