The Government of Ghana recently announced the rollout of a new set of road traffic regulations, aiming to curb the spate of road accidents in the country.
Like any other efforts by previous administrations which sought to deal with the carnage on our roads, the new regulations could, by intent, be a positive move. The law must, however be rolled out systematically and implemented thoughtfully, else it is bound to fail.
The regulations in question, ‘Road Traffic Regulations, 2026 (L.I. 2519)’, stand to fail if the government enforces all penalties simultaneously. The law, as has been put out, covers dozens of offences, from speeding to preaching in moving vehicles, with penalties that have jumped dramatically from what pertained in the old regulations. Three structural barriers make a “big bang” approach unworkable: Drivers are largely uninformed about the new rules, enforcement infrastructure is not ready, and compliance costs are stacking up.
The government must adopt a phased, systematic rollout that prioritizes fatal offences, builds infrastructure first, and educates the general public, and those the new rules affect directly in particular, before it penalizes offenders.
Changes in the new L.I from the old law appear drastic. This amounts to a sweeping overhaul. The law covers offences ranging from street racing, jumping red lights, and failing to stop at STOP signs to parking in disabled designated spaces and unauthorised use of bus stops. Preaching or hawking in a moving commercial vehicle now also carries a jail term of three to eight months, up from the previous maximum of 30 days, while fines range from 5 penalty units to 200 penalty units, with one penalty unit valued at GH¢12 .
What makes a law like this problematic is that, when you put these many behaviours together and criminalise them at once, you create a situation where a large portion of drivers are technically in violation of something. That undermines the moral authority of the law and makes selective enforcement inevitable.
One key concern regarding the coming of this new road traffic law is that there has not been adequate public and stakeholder engagement. The Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU) has stated that its members were not consulted before the L.I was passed, and remain unaware of the new rules. How can drivers comply with a law they do not understand?
The Ministry of Transport launched a nationwide education exercise in September 2026, with Transport Minister Joseph Bukari Nikpe acknowledging that nationwide education was “necessary to help drivers, transport operators, motor unions and other road users understand their responsibilities”. But one month of sensitization is certainly not enough time to absorb dozens of new offences and changed penalties.
As the GPRTU has argued, drivers need to be properly educated before enforcement begins. Penalizing people for violations they did not know existed is not enforcement—it is ambush.
It is a fact and legitimate argument to make also that the government has not put in place the needed infrastructure that will cater for effective implementation of the new law. CUTS International, a policy think tank, has publicly called on the government to delay full enforcement until traffic lights and road markings at enforcement locations have been inspected and repaired.
Their concerns are specific: some traffic lights across Accra are obscured by overgrown trees, others are damaged or out of service. At some junctions, one of two traffic lights works while the other does not. Faded lane markings and stop lines make it impossible for drivers to know where they should stop.
CUTS further put it bluntly: “The purpose of TRAFFITECH-GH is safer roads, not tickets arising from traffic lights drivers could not see”
And, it is worth noting that the government itself has acknowledged the need for more preparation. The Ghana Police Service rescheduled the full implementation of TRAFFITECH-GH from October 1 to November 1, specifically to allow for “more extensive public awareness and education.” This postponement is tacit recognition that the original timeline was too aggressive.
The compliance cost of new driver’s licence presents yet another element of challenge. The GPRTU has warned that the new licensing requirements could leave commercial drivers paying for up to three different licences—a professional driver’s licence, a separate commercial driver’s licence, and existing MMDA permits. The union’s deputy PRO pointed out: “It will not help businesses because if it happens like that, then it means we will be paying too much, increasing our operational cost”.
The mandatory towing requirement adds another layer of cost. Vehicle owners must now subscribe to a towing service or hold an insurance policy with towing cover. The previous 30-minute to one-hour grace period has been eliminated entirely—vehicles must be towed immediately upon breakdown. After 21 days, vehicles can be auctioned.
The GPRTU opposes the auction provision, arguing that “nobody will intentionally leave his vehicle on the road”, and that owners should be allowed to reclaim vehicles after paying towing and storage fees. What happens in this circumstance is that when compliance costs rise sharply while enforcement expands simultaneously, drivers face a rational calculation: the cost of obeying may exceed the cost of violating. That is not a recipe for compliance.
Statistically, the data on Ghana’s road accident deaths suggests the need for prioritization. Ghana recorded 2,949 road deaths in 2025, the highest in 35 years and an 18.2% increase over 2024. Speeding accounted for more than 60% of all collisions. Motorcycle crashes rose by 19.4%, with 6,548 motorcycles involved in crashes.
If the government focuses enforcement resources on these killers—speeding, drunk driving, red-light running, motorcycle helmet use—the safety gains will be immediate and measurable. Spreading limited enforcement capacity across preaching, hawking, parking violations, and administrative offences dilutes the impact on what actually kills people. The police have already indicated that the initial phase of TRAFFITECH-GH will focus on speeding. This is the right instinct. It should be formalized into policy.
To ensure effective implementation of the new road traffic regulations, enforce should focus strictly on offences with the clearest link to fatalities: speeding, red-light running, drunk driving, motorcycle helmet use, and seat belt use. These have the strongest public consensus and the highest safety return.
An equally important measure is to include offences that require physical infrastructure to comply with, such as stopping at YIELD signs, pedestrian crossing rules, bus stop regulations. Here, the relevant infrastructure should be provided before enforcement. Where such infrastructure exists, it should be functional.
The introduction of administrative and nuisance offences should come last. By that point drivers would have experienced a functioning system for about a year and understand the expectations.
It is expected for some to argue that gradualism signals weakness—that the government is not serious, that indiscipline continues while authorities tiptoe. The 2,949 deaths demand urgency.
But urgency does not require chaos. The government can signal seriousness by strictly enforcing a focused set of critical offences while phasing in the rest. Here the message becomes: “We are serious about saving lives, and we are doing this properly.” That is more credible than a blitz that collapses under its own weight, breeds corruption, and alienates the very drivers whose cooperation is essential.
In all, L.I. 2519 contains the right intentions. But good intentions do not make good policy. A law that overwhelms the enforcement system, punishes drivers for infrastructure failures, and imposes costs that make compliance irrational will not save lives. It will generate resentment, bribery, and evasion.
A systematic, phased approach—prioritizing fatal offences, building infrastructure first, and educating before penalizing—gives the law a chance to work. The goal is not to punish the maximum number of people. The goal is to reduce the 2,949 deaths. That requires strategy, not shock therapy.
Before issuing any fine, there should be complete visibility inspections at every enforcement location. Repair obscured signals, repaint faded markings, install missing speed limit signs. There should be face-to-face education with commercial driver unions. Equally, there should be verification to ensure that the vehicles registration database can accurately identify offenders.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Source link
