Civil society group Democracy Hub has filed a lawsuit at the Supreme Court challenging what it describes as an unconstitutional and illegal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Government of Ghana and the United States of America on the reception and detention of deported West African nationals.
The group alleges that the agreement, which allows for the temporary detention of involuntarily repatriated third-country nationals in Ghana, was secretly concluded without the required parliamentary approval.
According to the statement, the action, filed under Articles 2(1)(b) and 130(1) of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution seeks 28 separate reliefs from the Supreme Court, including a declaration that the MOU violates both Ghana’s Constitution and peremptory norms of international law.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear an interlocutory injunction on Wednesday, 22nd October 2025, aimed at halting the implementation of the agreement.
Background to the Case
In September 2025, Ghana’s Minister for Foreign Affairs announced that the government had reached an understanding with the United States to receive and temporarily detain West African nationals deported from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities. The deal reportedly formed part of negotiations to ease U.S. visa restrictions and sanctions against Ghana.
Since the announcement, at least 42 individuals have been involuntarily repatriated to Ghana in three separate batches; on 6th September 19th September, and 13th October 2025, and detained under military custody at the Bundase Military Training Camp. The statement alleges that several detainees were held for weeks “without charge, without access to lawyers, and in deplorable conditions.”
Democracy Hub argues that the MOU is void and unconstitutional, having bypassed parliamentary scrutiny in breach of Article 75(2) of the Constitution. It further claims that the arrangement violates Ghana’s international obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention, the Convention Against Torture, and the OAU Refugee Convention, all of which prohibit the transfer of individuals to countries where they risk persecution or torture, a principle known as non-refoulement.
The use of the military to detain civilians and asylum seekers, the group adds, breaches constitutional provisions guaranteeing personal liberty, human dignity, and the right to a fair trial.
Democracy Hub also warns that the agreement makes Ghana complicit in what it calls “chain refoulement,” a process where refugees are indirectly returned to danger through a third country contrary to binding international legal norms.
Democracy Hub insists that no government can contract Ghana out of its constitutional and human rights obligations, stressing that transparency, parliamentary oversight, and respect for human dignity are non-negotiable in international cooperation.
“This action is brought to protect not only the individuals affected but also Ghana’s democratic integrity, its constitutional supremacy, and its reputation as a rule-of-law state,” the statement said.
The group is represented by Merton & Everett LLP, a law firm based in Accra, and has made its legal filings available to the public upon request.
