Dafeamekpor Threatens Legal Action Over GAF Enlistment Age Limit

October 10, 2025 

Majority Chief Whip and Member of Parliament for South Dayi, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has issued a stern warning to the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF), threatening legal action if the military fails to review its maximum age requirement for enlistment.

Call for Alignment with Youth Authority Act

Speaking on Eyewitness News on Thursday, October 9, 2025, Mr. Dafeamekpor argued that the current age cap for military enlistment should be aligned with the National Youth Authority Act, 2016 (Act 939), which defines "youth" as individuals between the ages of 15 and 35.

The legislator insisted that medical fitness, rather than age alone, should be the primary criterion for determining eligibility for military service.

Legal Framework and Compliance

"I intend to test this matter because, you see, we need to test systems to let systems work. And when systems are supposed to work, they must work within the existing legal framework. We must all obey the law," Mr. Dafeamekpor stated emphatically.

He emphasized that the Armed Forces could maintain an age range consistent with existing legislation, provided applicants meet the necessary medical standards required for military service.

International Comparisons

The MP proposed that the military adopt an approach similar to many other countries, where younger applicants can be recruited with appropriate safeguards.

"I won't have any problem if the armed forces say that the person between the ages of 15 years and 35 years is eligible to apply, but subject to a medical fitness test, because in a lot of countries, persons below 18 years are eligible to be recruited into the army, subject to parental consent," he noted.

Mr. Dafeamekpor shared comparative data showing that countries such as Benin, Côte d'Ivoire, Togo, Nigeria, and even the United States permit enlistment well into a person's 30s or beyond, suggesting that Ghana's current restrictions may be unnecessarily restrictive.

Threat of Judicial Action

The Majority Chief Whip warned that if GAF fails to respond to calls for a review of the age requirement, he will have no choice but to seek redress through the courts.

"So this matter must be tested; if the army resists this call, it may leave me with no option but to seek a remedy in the judicial forum," he explained.

He further argued that the army, being constitutionally established under Article 102 by Parliament, cannot conduct its business without recourse to laid-down legislation, including the National Youth Authority Act.

Constituent Concerns

Earlier, in a post on his official X (formerly Twitter) page, Mr. Dafeamekpor revealed that several party supporters had expressed concerns about the existing age limit, which they feel unfairly excludes qualified individuals from serving in the military.

The MP's intervention appears to be driven by these constituent concerns and a broader belief that Ghana's military recruitment policies should reflect both contemporary legal frameworks and international best practices.

Constitutional Questions

At the heart of Dafeamekpor's argument is a fundamental question about the relationship between different arms of government and their adherence to parliamentary legislation.

"Our army is constitutionally established and given effect to it under Article 102 by Parliament, and subsequently with legislation such as the National Youth Authority Act, which is the law that governs the youth bracket of this country, whether the army can continue to conduct its business without recourse to this laid down legislation," he stated.

The Ghana Armed Forces has yet to respond publicly to Mr. Dafeamekpor's call for a review of its enlistment age requirements.

If the military does not address the concerns raised, the matter may soon find its way to the courts, where judges would be asked to determine whether GAF's current age restrictions conflict with the National Youth Authority Act and whether the military must comply with the legislative definition of youth in its recruitment practices.

This legal challenge could have significant implications for military recruitment policy and the broader relationship between parliamentary legislation and military operational standards.