GHANA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Olusola Ogundimu and Esohe Olajide, Integrated Legal Consultants
with the reasoning or the conclusion reached by the Court. He indicated that Guideline 3.2.10 was indubi - tably discriminatory and unconstitutional, as it was not necessary, reasonable or proportional. He added that certain restrictions placed on persons and profession - als due to their social or economic status as persons who can arouse the interest of society as against other persons who engage in similar trades or professions is clearly discriminatory. Public reaction to the decision There were mixed reactions from the public follow - ing the decision of the Supreme Court. One school of thought was in support of the Supreme Court’s affir - mation of the FDA’s ban on celebrities and well-known persons taking part in the advertisement of alcoholic beverages, as they believed this was in the best health interest of their followers, many of whom were minors or young adults who could be easily influenced. On the other hand, some persons were of the opinion that the ban would disrupt revenue streams for the celebrities as well as the producers of these alcoholic products in Ghana, as they invest heavily in market - ing their products in Ghana. Therefore, producers of alcoholic beverages in Ghana will be forced to explore other alternatives for advertising their products. In an interview with an online news outlet on 19 June 2024, the plaintiff expressed his disappointment with the ruling, and indicated that his colleagues in the cre - ative space were also disappointed. He was, however, grateful that the case had helped to affirm that par - ties can go to court to challenge any law that hinders progress in the creative sector.
During a television interview after delivery of the rul - ing, the FDA’s Director of Legal Affairs stated that the FDA’s approach was to mitigate the effect of adver - tisements on public health, and he encouraged critics to consult the statistics provided on the World Health Organization’s website as justification for the ban. Conclusion The case of Mark Darlington Osae v Food and Drugs Authority & Anor in essence seems to have brought closure to the controversy and agitation surrounding the FDA’s ban on celebrities and well-known persons endorsing or being featured in advertisements of alco - holic beverages. Producers in the industry have had to devise other ways of advertising their products in Ghana following the ban. The decision also helped to affirm the fact that regu - latory bodies, when empowered by the law to make directives or guidelines that regulate activities in a sector, are allowed to do so to the extent to which the law permits, even when such directives restrict the activities of certain members of the public in the interest of the greater good of society. The FDA on its part has ensured strict compliance with its directives in relation to foods, drugs, cos - metics and household chemicals in Ghana, as it pre-approves these advertisements and prosecutes anyone who offends them or makes public any unap - proved advertisements.
168 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook