Six-year-old Pognaa could not understand why she had lost the opportunity to study abroad. She only knew that a scholarship that might have transformed her life had disappeared because her father refused to sign the consent form required for her passport.
Born outside marriage or “wedlock” to Dagaba parents, Pognaa became caught between customary traditions and Ghana’s modern legal and administrative systems. Her father’s family had never paid her mother’s dowry.
Under the customary laws recognised within her community, Pognaa was therefore regarded as belonging to her mother’s lineage. Yet, for passport purposes, the state required the biological father’s consent.
The father, resentful that customary law did not give him the custody or authority he believed he deserved, refused to sign. His decision created a painful deadlock. Although he was not exercising day-to-day care, his signature remained necessary for his daughter to obtain a travel document.
In effect, an administrative safeguard intended to protect children became a means of preventing one child from accessing an important educational opportunity.
Pognaa’s experience reveals a difficult question: how can Ghana protect children from trafficking, abduction and unlawful movement without allowing legitimate parental disagreements, customary disputes or bureaucratic procedures to destroy their opportunities?
Why Passport Controls Matter
A passport is much more than a document that permits international travel. It is a recognised form of identity, evidence of nationality and an important record used by immigration and border authorities. For children, the document can establish links between the child, the child’s parents and official national records.
This identification function is especially important because children are among the most vulnerable victims of trafficking and unlawful movement. Criminal networks may attempt to transport children using false names, forged birth certificates, misleading promises or the assistance of individuals pretending to be relatives, humanitarian workers or employers.
Passport controls also create an auditable trail that can assist authorities when a child is reported missing or is suspected to have been moved unlawfully.
Ghana’s official passport guidance requires applicants to submit documents such as the child’s birth certificate, parental consent and identification documents.
These safeguards are necessary. However, a system designed to stop criminals can also create obstacles for families facing separation, domestic conflict, customary disputes, absent parents or unresolved custody arrangements.
The Regional Threat
The urgency of child-protection measures is evident across West Africa. Child trafficking continues to flourish in environments marked by poverty, displacement, insecurity and the desperate search for education or employment.
Recent reports from Nigeria have illustrated the scale and creativity of the threat. One reported case involved a suspected member of a trafficking syndicate who allegedly sold children she had given birth to.
Another investigation described criminal groups allegedly posing as civil-society organisations and humanitarian workers. These groups reportedly approached families displaced by violence with promises of a “Back-to-School” programme. More than 180 children were reportedly rescued.
Such cases demonstrate how traffickers exploit trust. They may present themselves as charity workers, teachers, sponsors, relatives or employers.
Ghana has also confronted child vulnerability linked to organised begging. A Ghana Immigration Service operation in Accra reportedly led to the apprehension of 1,055 persons, including 662 children, 145 men and 248 women.
Against this background, relaxing passport controls for minors without creating effective alternatives would expose children to serious danger.
Layered Safeguards in Ghana
Ghana’s minor-passport process uses several layers of protection. The objective is not simply to issue a travel document, but to establish that the child is genuine, that the adults involved are properly identified and that the proposed movement is lawful.
The main safeguards include:
Biometric birth registration. Linking a child’s identity to an official biometric birth record makes it more difficult for traffickers to rely on forged documents or false ages.
Parental consent and identity checks. Applications generally require parental or legal-guardian consent, supported by identity documents.
In-person presentation. The child is expected to appear for the application process, allowing officials to capture a live photograph and, where appropriate, fingerprints. This reduces the possibility of an adult applying secretly or using the identity of another child.
Guarantors and professional witnesses assume legal responsibility for the information they provide. This discourages people from supporting applications for children they do not genuinely know.
Digital processing and audit trails and Restrictions on intermediaries. Limiting the role of unauthorized agents from manipulating applications or exploiting families.
These measures form a defensive architecture. Each layer addresses a different vulnerability. Ghana’s legal response is also rooted in the Human Trafficking Act, 2005, which criminalises trafficking and recognises the particular vulnerability of children. The Act provides an important legal foundation for prevention, investigation and prosecution.
When Consent Is Withheld
The central problem arises when one parent is absent, unavailable, deceased, uncooperative or involved in a custody dispute. A strict requirement for both parents’ signatures can prevent abuse, but it can also give one parent disproportionate power over the child’s future.
In cases such as Pognaa’s, the parent refusing consent may not be motivated by a genuine concern about the child’s safety.
In my line of work, I have encountered more people than one might imagine who are in desperate situations and seeking guidance on this matter.
The answer should not be to remove safeguards. Depending on the circumstances, a parent may need to seek a court order authorising the passport application or the child’s travel. A custody ruling, statutory declaration or other legally recognised document may also be required where the other parent cannot be located or has no lawful basis for refusing consent. If the absent parent lives abroad, a notarised consent authenticated by a Ghanaian diplomatic mission may be accepted.
These remedies are important, but they may be expensive, slow and intimidating. A court process can take weeks or months while scholarship deadlines and medical opportunities may be immediate. The family may need legal assistance, transport to court, document authentication and repeated visits to public offices.
The challenge, therefore, is not only legal. It is also practical. A remedy that exists on paper but is inaccessible to poor or rural families cannot fully protect the child.
A More Responsive System
Ghana can maintain strong safeguards while improving its response to genuine disputes. The proposed reforms could help.
First, there is need to clearly distinguish credible child-protection concerns from refusals rooted in private disputes. This means establishing a child-sensitive escalation mechanism within the passport system to allow allegations of unreasonable withholding of consent to be referred promptly to the appropriate social-welfare, legal or judicial authority.
Secondly urgent cases involving scholarships or medical treatment need to be prioritized hence, completing verification within a timeframe that reflects the child’s best interests.
Also, strengthening coordination among passport-issuing authorities, child-protection agencies, the Immigration Service, the Police Service and the courts, while intensifying public education on the importance of following due process.
Pognaa’s story is a warning about the unintended consequences of well-intentioned protection. Ghana’s minor-passport safeguards are essential because child trafficking, abduction and unlawful cross-border movement remain real and destructive threats.
However, protection must not become a mechanism through which one parent can hold a child’s future hostage. Customary law, modern family arrangements and state procedures do not always fit neatly together. When they collide, the child should not bear the full cost. Parents are hereby encouraged to start the process early and should follow the official requirements.
By Cecila K Ansah
