Doelegistslawyers > Blog & Articles > ⁠Constitutional law > Compulsory Acquisition in Ghana: Constitutional, Statutory & Judicial Analysis

Compulsory Acquisition in Ghana: Constitutional, Statutory & Judicial Analysis

January 29, 2026 ⁠Constitutional law

Seth Doe 

Assisted by 

Sarah Asante , Philipa Hagan , Ewurama Mongson

COMPULSORY ACQUISITION IN GHANA- A CONSTITUTIONAL, STATUTORY, AND JUDICIAL ANALYSIS

1. Introduction

Compulsory acquisition refers to the mandatory taking of private property by the State for public purposes. The concept is rooted in the sovereign power of eminent domain, which allows the State to override private proprietary interests where public necessity so demands. In Ghana, compulsory acquisition is not arbitrary. It is regulated by constitutional safeguards, statutory procedures, executive instruments, and judicial oversight to ensure fairness, accountability, and protection of private property rights.

The law recognizes that property ownership is a fundamental human right. However, that right is not absolute and may be limited where public interest, national development, public safety, or social welfare requires State intervention. The tension between private property rights and public necessity has shaped Ghana’s compulsory acquisition jurisprudence.

2. Conceptual Meaning of Compulsory Acquisition

The word “compulsory” denotes something required, mandatory, or necessary. “Acquisition” refers to the taking or obtaining of property or assets. Compulsory acquisition, therefore, means the legally enforced taking of private property by the State without the consent of the owner, but subject to constitutional and statutory safeguards, including compensation.

3. Legal Framework Governing Compulsory Acquisition in Ghana

Compulsory acquisition in Ghana is regulated by four main sources of law:

  • The 1992 Constitution
  • The Lands Act, 2020 (Act 1036)
  • Executive Instruments
  • Judicial decisions

These sources collectively establish the conditions, procedures, and limitations governing State acquisition of private land.

4. Constitutional Protection of Property Rights

4.1 Property as a Fundamental Human Right

Article 12(2) of the 1992 Constitution guarantees that every person in Ghana is entitled to fundamental human rights and freedoms, subject to respect for the rights of others and the public interest. Property ownership falls within this protected category.

Article 18(1) further affirms that every person has the right to own property either alone or in association with others. Article 18(2) prohibits interference with the privacy of home and property except in accordance with law and where necessary in a free and democratic society for public safety, economic well-being, public health, public morality, crime prevention, or protection of the rights of others.

These provisions establish the principle that deprivation of property is only permissible under strictly regulated conditions.

4.2 Meaning of Public Interest

Article 295 of the 1992 Constitution defines public interest as any right or advantage intended to enure to the benefit generally of the whole people of Ghana. This broad definition empowers the State to acquire land for projects that promote national welfare, infrastructure development, and social advancement.

5. Constitutional Requirements for Compulsory Acquisition by the State

Article 20 of the 1992 Constitution is the principal constitutional provision governing compulsory acquisition.

5.1 Conditions for Acquisition

Article 20(1) provides that no property shall be compulsorily acquired unless:

The acquisition is necessary in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality, public health, town and country planning, or development promoting public benefit; and the necessity is clearly stated and reasonably justified.

This imposes a burden on the State to demonstrate genuine public necessity.

5.2 Compensation and Access to Court

Article 20(2) mandates:

Prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation; and

Right of access to the High Court for the determination of interests and compensation disputes.

This provision ensures judicial oversight and procedural fairness.

5.3 Resettlement of Displaced Persons

Article 20(3) requires the State to resettle displaced inhabitants on suitable alternative land with due regard for economic well-being and socio-cultural values. This reflects the social justice dimension of compulsory acquisition.

5.4 Exceptions to Constitutional Protection

Article 20(4) permits property acquisition under general laws relating to bankruptcy, insolvency, execution of court judgments, dangerous property, limitation of actions, investigations, and provision of public utilities, provided compensation is paid where damage occurs.

5.5 Restriction on Use of Acquired Land

Article 20(5) mandates that compulsorily acquired property must be used strictly for the purpose for which it was acquired or another valid public purpose.

Article 20(6) further provides that where land is not used for the stated purpose, the original owner must be given the first option to re-acquire the land upon refund of compensation or payment of the current market value.

6. Statutory Regulation under the Lands Act 2020 (Act 1036)

6.1 Power of the State to Acquire Land

Section 233 of Act 1036 authorizes the State to compulsorily acquire land for public purposes, including:

  • Defence and national security
  • Public utilities and infrastructure
  • Roads, railways, pipelines, and dams
  • Town planning and resettlement
  • Development projects promoting public benefit

The section requires that the necessity must be clearly stated, fair and adequate compensation must be promptly paid, acquisition must be effected through publication of an Executive Instrument in the Gazette specifying the location, extent, and purpose of the acquisition.

6.2 Allocation of Public Lands

Section 235 of Act 1036 provides that land acquired by the State must be allocated strictly for the purpose for which it was acquired or another public interest purpose. It further prohibits the grant of freehold or perpetually renewable leases over public lands, confirming that public lands remain permanently vested in the State.

6.3 Protection Against Encroachment and Adverse Possession

Section 236 expressly abolishes adverse possession against public lands. It provides that unlawful occupation does not confer ownership rights and criminalizes unauthorized sale or conveyance of public land with penalties including imprisonment.

This provision reinforces constitutional principles and judicial decisions preventing illegal privatization of public lands.

7. Other Forms of Property Deprivation Outside State Acquisition

7.1 Criminal Forfeiture

Section 294 of the Criminal Procedure Act allows confiscation of property used in criminal activities such as fraud, money laundering, drug trafficking, and economic crimes. Such seizures serve punitive and compensatory functions.

7.2 Civil Debt Execution

Although imprisonment for civil debt is prohibited, courts may authorize the seizure and sale of property to satisfy judgment debts. In Hemans v Coffie, the court held that debtors cannot be imprisoned for inability to pay debts. In Martin Kpebu v Attorney-General, the court reaffirmed that bail guarantors cannot be imprisoned for failure to pay bond sums, but civil enforcement mechanisms, including property execution, remain valid.

7.3 Abandonment and Intestate Property

Under PNDCL 111, where a person dies intestate without identifiable beneficiaries, property may revert to the State. Voluntary abandonment may also result in State acquisition where property is deliberately relinquished.

7.4 Foreign Ownership Restrictions

Article 266(3) converts pre-1969 freehold interests held by non-citizens into 50-year leaseholds with reversionary interests vesting in the State. This represents constitutionally sanctioned involuntary divestment.

8. Compulsory Acquisition by Allodial Title Holders

Sections 50(21) and (22) of Act 1036 permit allodial title holders to compulsorily take over usufructuary lands for communal development, town expansion, or public benefit, subject to payment of not less than forty percent of land value or provision of alternative land. This reflects customary compulsory acquisition at the community level.

9. Judicial Interpretation of Compulsory Acquisition

9.1 Nii Kpobi Tettey Tsuru v Attorney-General

The plaintiff challenged the State’s redevelopment of La Wireless Station lands acquired in 1950 for wireless communication purposes. The Supreme Court held that since the land was acquired on a 99-year lease expiring in 2047, it remained public land. The court further held that “public interest” must be interpreted broadly and liberally. It ruled that using the land to construct accommodation for visiting heads of state under the Ghana @ 50 project still served public interest because the infrastructure benefited Ghanaians beyond the celebration period.

9.2 Sam Okudzeto v Lands Commission and Obetsebi-Lamptey

The plaintiff challenged the allocation of public lands originally acquired for government bungalows to private developers for affordable housing. The Supreme Court held that land compulsorily acquired for one public purpose may be reallocated for another public purpose, provided constitutional safeguards under Article 296 on fairness and accountability are respected. The court confirmed that affordable housing projects constitute public interest.

9.3 Memuna Moudy v Nkrumah Kofi Antwi

The plaintiff continued exercising control over the land after it had been compulsorily acquired and compensated. The court held that compulsory acquisition vests legal ownership in the State and extinguishes the former owner’s proprietary rights. The plaintiff’s occupation did not amount to adverse possession since prescription does not operate against the State. The court ruled that former owners cannot grant interests in acquired public lands.

9.4 Nii Tetteh Opremreh II v Attorney-General

The High Court ruled that where acquired land is diverted from its stated purpose, original owners are constitutionally entitled to reversionary rights under Article 20(6), reinforcing accountability in State land management.

9.5 Amontia v Managing Director of Ghana Telecom

The Court of Appeal held that the construction of staff housing on land acquired for a wireless station was not inconsistent with the original public purpose since employee accommodation formed part of the operational infrastructure serving public benefit.

9.6 Norga Grumah v Madam Nafisa Iddrisu

The Supreme Court held that compulsory acquisition does not vest absolute ownership permanently in the State where land is unused or partially used. Original owners retain first option rights to re-acquire land upon State offer. The court emphasized that this right subsists until expressly rejected.

9.7 Board of Directors of Achimota School v Nii Nortei

The court held that public lands cannot be encroached upon merely because former owners remain in possession. It ruled that failure by the State to fully utilize acquired land does not entitle private individuals to reoccupy or sell portions without lawful authorization.

9.8 Yakubu Awabego v Tindana Agongo 

The Supreme Court held that compensation for compulsorily acquired customary land must be paid to the rightful allodial authority. In this case, the court determined that the clan head, rather than individual family heads, was entitled to receive compensation for land acquired for Bulk Oil Storage infrastructure.

10. Vesting of Lands

Vested lands involve situations where legal title is held by the State as trustee while beneficial ownership remains with the indigenous community. Sections 268 to 270 of Act 1036 prohibit new vesting of stool, skin, clan, or family lands, regulate management through joint committees, and provide for de-vesting through Executive Instruments upon recommendation by the Lands Commission.

This system ensures accountability, revenue sharing, and restoration of management rights where State control is no longer necessary.

11. Conclusion

Compulsory acquisition in Ghana represents a constitutionally regulated balance between private property rights and national development needs. The Constitution, Lands Act, and judicial decisions collectively impose strict procedural safeguards, including necessity, compensation, judicial access, resettlement obligations, and reversionary rights. Ghanaian courts have consistently interpreted public interest broadly while simultaneously protecting former owners from abuse of State power. The law, therefore, reflects a modern approach to eminent domain that promotes development while safeguarding justice, equity, and constitutional accountability.

Social

Related articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Consult a Lawyer

If you want to get a consultation without any obligations, fill in the form below and we will get in touch with you.
+ (233) 25 768 8288
0257688288