Ghana cannot build a modern cultural and creative economy on a legal framework designed more than three decades ago.
The review of PNDCL 238 offers an opportunity to strengthen cultural governance, empower the Centres for National Culture and create a sustainable institutional framework for Ghana’s creative future.
“The future of Ghanaian culture cannot be secured by preserving yesterday’s institutional framework alone.”
Ghana is experiencing a cultural moment that demands more than celebration.
Across the country, festivals are attracting visitors, young people are turning creative skills into livelihoods, Ghanaian music and fashion are reaching international markets, digital content is creating new opportunities, and traditional knowledge continues to inspire contemporary enterprise.
Yet behind this cultural vibrancy lies an important question: Is Ghana’s legal framework for governing culture still fit for purpose?
That question brings us to the National Commission on Culture Law, 1990 (PNDCL 238).
Enacted more than three decades ago, PNDCL 238 established the National Commission on Culture (NCC) and provided the legal foundation for Ghana’s Centres for National Culture.
The law remains an important foundation for national cultural development. But Ghana’s cultural and creative landscape has changed substantially since 1990.
Today, the sector encompasses not only traditional arts and heritage but also film, photography, fashion, design, digital content, publishing, creative technology, cultural tourism, commercial events, crafts and a growing range of professional creative services.
The law must therefore evolve with the sector it was created to serve.
The review of PNDCL 238 should not simply be an administrative exercise or a change of institutional name. It should be an opportunity to redefine Ghana’s approach to cultural governance.
A modern national cultural institution must be capable of coordinating policy, establishing appropriate standards, maintaining sector data, supporting cultural enterprises, facilitating investment, protecting cultural expressions and providing proportionate regulatory oversight.
“Promotion alone is no longer enough.
A modern cultural sector requires policy, standards, enterprise, investment, data and sustainable financing.”
One proposal deserving serious national discussion is the transformation of the NCC into a statutory National Culture and Creative Economy Authority, or another appropriate authority structure.
The objective would be to give the national institution the statutory capacity to develop culture as both a national heritage asset and an economic sector, while maintaining accountability and avoiding duplication with existing institutions.
Empowering the CNCs
The Centres for National Culture should be central to this reform
Rather than being viewed primarily as government-owned venues for cultural programmes and facility rentals, the Centres could become regional and district cultural and creative economy development hubs.
A modern Centre could provide cultural training, business support, exhibitions, research and documentation, cultural markets, professional development, festival support and access to information and opportunities.
It could also serve as a regional point for the registration and monitoring of prescribed cultural and creative operators, where such regulation is appropriate.
“The Centre for National Culture should be more than a venue. It should be the cultural development engine of its region.”
Regulation without stifling creativity
Stronger regulatory powers must, however, be approached carefully.
Culture thrives on creativity, experimentation and diversity. Regulation should therefore be proportionate and risk-based, rather than imposing unnecessary bureaucracy on artists and community groups.
A tiered system could distinguish between community cultural organisations, professional practitioners, commercial enterprises and large-scale cultural events.
The objective should be to establish appropriate standards for professional, commercial and safety-related activities without turning cultural regulation into censorship.
A coordinated cultural economy
The proposed amendments must also take account of the Creative Arts Industry Act, 2020 (Act 1048) and the Creative Arts Agency, as well as the mandates of the Ghana Tourism Authority, Copyright Office, National Film Authority and Ghana Museums and Monuments Board.
The solution should not be competing institutions with overlapping responsibilities.
Ghana needs clear mandates, institutional coordination and one coherent national cultural development framework.
Where culture and tourism intersect, for example through festivals and cultural tourism, the relevant institutions should collaborate rather than duplicate functions.
Funding culture as an investment
No reform will succeed without sustainable financing.
If Ghana expects culture to contribute to employment, tourism, entrepreneurship, national identity and economic development, cultural institutions must receive adequate resources.
An amended law should therefore provide for diversified and lawful financing, including parliamentary appropriations, government support, approved fees, grants, partnerships, sponsorships and other appropriate sources.
The Centres should also be enabled, within public financial management requirements, to retain an approved proportion of internally generated revenue for maintenance, programming and infrastructure development.
Any new levy must be carefully harmonised with existing legislation to avoid imposing unnecessary multiple charges on practitioners and enterprises.
Modern cultural legislation must also strengthen the protection of Ghanaian cultural expressions—traditional designs, symbols, music, dances, crafts, indigenous knowledge, costumes and oral traditions.
Documentation, authentication, protection and responsible commercial use should form part of a modern cultural heritage framework, developed in collaboration with traditional authorities, communities and relevant institutions.
Ghana should also establish a comprehensive National Culture and Creative Economy Register to provide reliable data on practitioners, enterprises, cultural groups, festivals, infrastructure and other cultural assets.
Without credible data, effective cultural planning remains difficult.
The 1990 law served Ghana at an important stage of national development. But legislation must evolve with society.
The proposed review provides an opportunity to move Ghana from promotion to governance; from fragmented programmes to coordinated development; from dependence to diversified financing and from cultural consumption to cultural enterprise;
We must also move from viewing culture solely as heritage to recognising culture as both heritage and an engine of development.
The process should involve cultural practitioners, traditional authorities, creative businesses, academia, civil society, local government, tourism stakeholders and relevant statutory institutions.
The final legislation should also receive rigorous legal scrutiny before parliamentary consideration.
The question before Ghana is therefore larger than whether to amend an old law.
It is whether we are prepared to build a cultural governance architecture capable of protecting our heritage, empowering our practitioners and creating sustainable opportunities for the next generation.
“A modern cultural economy requires a modern cultural law.”
That is the conversation PNDCL 238 should now provoke.
The writer is the PRO of the CNC, Central Region
