Ghanaian youth activist Oliver Barker Vormawor has launched a scathing critique of former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo’s administration, labeling it a “regime committed to destroying democracy” by allegedly manipulating the judiciary to silence dissent.

Speaking during a televised interview on TV3’s KeyPoints, Vormawor accused the previous government of systematically abusing legal processes to target critics, including himself, in what he describes as a broader assault on democratic freedoms.

Central to his allegations is his personal legal ordeal. Vormawor revealed he was arrested in 2022 and charged with treason felony following his public criticism of the controversial e-levy policy—a charge he insists was politically motivated. “For three years, I’ve been dragged through the courts over baseless accusations. Even a primary school child could see these charges lacked merit,” he stated. The activist confirmed that the current Attorney General has notified him of plans to formally discontinue the case, acknowledging its lack of legal grounding.

Vormawor’s remarks underscore a broader accusation: that the Akufo-Addo administration weaponized the judicial system to stifle opposition. “When you criminalize free speech and use courts to harass citizens, you erode democracy itself,” he argued. He called for full transparency regarding alleged abuses of power during Akufo-Addo’s tenure, warning that without accountability, former officials might exploit “moral authority” to distort public discourse.

The activist’s claims tap into lingering tensions over Ghana’s democratic health. Critics have long raised concerns about judicial independence and the misuse of state power under Akufo-Addo, particularly in high-profile cases involving opposition figures. Vormawor’s case, now deemed a legal farce by the current administration, has become a lightning rod for debates about political retribution and the fragility of civic freedoms.

Political analysts note that while Vormawor’s rhetoric is incendiary, his allegations reflect widespread unease about institutional integrity. His call to “open the box” on past governance resonates with civil society groups demanding audits of alleged state-sponsored repression. However, supporters of the former administration have dismissed his claims as hyperbolic, arguing that judicial processes—however protracted—were followed lawfully.

As Ghana navigates its post-Akufo-Addo political landscape, Vormawor’s outcry highlights a pivotal challenge: reconciling the nation’s democratic aspirations with accountability for those accused of undermining them. His case, and its abrupt dismissal, may fuel demands for systemic reforms to insulate Ghana’s judiciary from partisan influence—a test for the current government’s commitment to breaking from the past.