Ghana's Draft NITA Bill Sparks Controversy Over Regulation of IT Professionals

The single sharpest fact in the draft NITA Bill is the proposal to establish the National Information Technology Agency (NITA) as a regulatory authority for ICT and digital services, with powers over ICT infrastructure, cloud, SaaS, digital platforms, public-sector technology procurement, professional certification, business premises, mergers, ownership, standards, audits, sanctions, and even the structure of government digital infrastructure.

And this isn't just about licensing IT professionals. The draft bill proposes that no person may engage in business or a related activity in the ICT sector unless they're granted a licence. This includes installation of ICT infrastructure, development or provision of ICT products and services, and activities requiring licensing or certification.

But what does this mean for the average Ghanaian? It could lead to a significant increase in the cost of doing business in the ICT sector. The bill proposes that a licence applicant must be an adult Ghanaian citizen, or a company/partnership/association/body “wholly owned by a citizen.” This could essentially make it illegal to engage remote experts to work on a system deployed in Ghana. It's a move that don't necessarily benefit local businesses, as they won't be able to tap into international expertise.

The bill also proposes the certification of ICT professionals. Section 46 says a person can't be appointed as an ICT professional in a public or private institution unless they're certified by the Authority. NITA will determine the criteria and procedure. However, the term “IT/ICT professional” isn't like “nurse,” “electrician,” “lawyer,” or “chartered accountant.” Those occupations usually have a more defined body of practice, recognised training path, public-risk rationale, and a reserved act or protected title. They're well-established professions with clear guidelines.

The bill doesn't stop there. It also proposes closure, seizure, suspension and enforcement powers for NITA. This could lead to a situation where small businesses are forced to operate through “certified” fronts, reducing access to affordable hardware support in rural and low-income areas. They won't be able to compete with larger companies that have the resources to comply with NITA's regulations.

So, what do other countries do? In Nigeria, for instance, the Computer Professionals Registration Council of Nigeria was created under a 1993 law and has a broad mandate over persons and organisations providing computing professional services. However, the arrangement in Nigeria hasn't worked out, and the country still has a huge informal and startup-driven tech sector. It hasn't achieved its intended goals.

In Canada, the approach is narrower and more legally coherent. Engineering regulators restrict titles such as “software engineer,” “computer engineer,” and “firmware engineer” where those titles imply professional engineering. But even there, regulators recognise that not all software development is software engineering. They've taken a more nuanced approach.

The Ghanaian government should take a cue from these countries and rethink the draft NITA Bill. Instead of focusing on regulating IT professionals, the bill should focus on fixing wasteful, opaque, and poorly thought through public ICT procurement. A more sensible approach would be to target the most critical functions. It's an area that needs improvement.

“A careful NITA law could be one of Ghana’s most anti-katanomic and groundbreaking digital economy reforms,” said one expert.

The bill should be rewritten around regulated activities, not “IT professionals.” It's a better approach. The following quick fixes would be a good start: Replace the broad Section 35 ban with a schedule of licensable high-risk ICT activities. Rewrite Section 46 so certification applies only to defined risk roles. Add exemptions for employees doing internal work, students, hobbyists, open-source contributors, micro repairers, ordinary retail sales, internal IT departments, low-risk website/app development, and small businesses below clear thresholds. It's a way to make the bill more effective.

The citizen-only ownership clause should also be removed or radically narrowed. It's a clause that won't benefit the local economy. Use public-procurement preferences, local-capacity requirements, security vetting for sensitive contracts, and Ghanaian participation incentives instead of a blanket nationality-based ownership restriction. It's a more effective way to promote local businesses.

The draft NITA Bill has the potential to stifle innovation in Ghana's ICT sector. The government should take a more nuanced approach, focusing on regulated activities rather than IT professionals. Only then can Ghana's digital economy truly thrive. It's a matter of finding the right balance.