|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Claim: Frederick Opoku, the Rent Control’s acting commissioner, said the Ghana rent laws permit landlords to evict tenants who bring multiple sexual partners into their homes.
Verdict: Misleading. According to DUBAWA findings, “nuisance,” “annoyance,” and “immorality” are part of the reasons for which a tenant may be evicted by a landlord. However, there is no clear case law supporting the claim that bringing multiple partners into a rented home constitutes one of the specific grounds listed under Section 17 of the Rent Act, 1963 (Act 220), which permits a landlord to recover possession of a property.
Full Text
On Aug. 21, 2026, the Acting Commissioner of Rent Control, Frederick Opoku, listed several behaviours that he said could give landlords grounds to evict tenants. Among them, he said that bringing multiple men or women into a house could constitute grounds for eviction, explaining that it could lead children in the house to imitate the conduct.
GhanaWeb shared the remark on Aug. 22, 2026, under the headline “Landlords can evict tenants for bringing multiple girls or boys to property – Rent Commissioner.” A card containing a similar claim was subsequently shared on JoyNews’ platforms on Aug. 25, 2026, with the headline, “Landlords can evict tenants over multiple sexual partners visiting property – Rent Commissioner, Frederick Opoku.”
It was also published on HitzFM’s Instagram page (archived here). UTV, Neat FM’s sister station, collected the public’s views on the Rent Commissioner’s comments for the Instagram page (archived here).
Verification
DUBAWA investigated whether Ghanaian rent law empowers landlords to lawfully evict tenants for having several romantic or sexual visitors.
What the Rent Act actually says
Ghana’s landlord-tenant relations are primarily governed by the Rent Act, 1963 (Act 220), supplemented by the Rent Control Law, 1986 (PNDCL 138) and the Rent Regulations, 1964 (LI 369).
Section 17 of Act 220 specifies the exclusive grounds for eviction and requires an order of the rent magistrate’s court.
Key grounds include unpaid rent over a month, breach of tenancy, neighbour nuisance and annoyance, and property damage. Other issues include legitimate landlord self-occupancy, business or redevelopment needs, and the use of property illegally or immorally acquired.
Section 17 does not give a clear definition of what constitutes nuisance, annoyance, or immorality.
DUBAWA therefore decided to find out if there is case law to support the claim that “bringing multiple sexual partners” is grounds for ejection.
The researcher did not find explicit case law to support that claim. However, in Ofori V Arthur [1978] GLR 112, the court held that converting a residential dwelling into a commercial enterprise, particularly a brothel, is a basis for ejection.
The Act also makes unilateral or “self-help” eviction, a landlord forcing a tenant out without a court order, a criminal offence, regardless of the reason cited. Even where a landlord believes a ground for eviction exists, the proper route is to apply to the Rent Magistrate or a court for an order. The Rent Control Department and its committees can mediate but cannot enforce eviction themselves.
Separately from the Rent Act, the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) contains provisions under its “Brothels, Prostitution” heading that deal with keeping a brothel and related offences. These provisions could, in principle, become relevant if a landlord’s premises were established to be used as a brothel. However, it requires proof of a commercial or organised sexual-service operation, not merely a tenant having multiple partners visit. It is a materially different and higher legal bar than the general scenario described in the Commissioner’s remarks.
DUBAWA interviewed a private legal practitioner, Francis Adongo, who said he was unaware of any such provision in the Rent Act, which is under review in Parliament. He explained that a landlord who personally objects to such conduct, for instance, out of concern for children in the household, might feel entitled to ask the tenant to leave. He separately pointed to provisions in the Criminal Offences Act on brothel-keeping as a related, though distinct, legal avenue in extreme cases.
However, Adongo was emphatic that a landlord cannot forcibly remove a tenant who refuses to leave. He said,
“If you look at our current rent legislation, it comes across as forceful eviction of a tenant. To the extent that if a tenant is unable to pay rent, sometimes that tenant is referred to as a statutory tenant. And once you are referred to as a statutory tenant, it means that you are now in the premises by operation of law. So, for me, if you want to evict a tenant who is not ready to be evicted, you have to go to court to seek a court order to evict them. But on their own, unilaterally, they [landlords] cannot say, go out because you are bringing multiple partners.”
Asking a tenant to leave is different from a tenant being legally obliged to comply. Where the tenant refuses, the landlord’s only lawful recourse is to go to court.
The Rent Act does not list “multiple sexual partners” as one of its statutory grounds for eviction, and no landlord, including one who strongly objects to a tenant’s visitors, can lawfully evict that tenant without going through the Rent Control process and, ultimately, a court order.
The narrower legal hook that could conceivably apply—proven, convicted immoral or illegal use of the premises, or brothel-keeping—is a far higher and more specific bar than the general conduct the Commissioner described, and was not the framing he used.
Conclusion
The claim that landlords can evict tenants simply for bringing multiple sexual partners to a property is misleading. Ghana’s Rent Act, 1963 (Act 220) does not list this as a distinct ground for eviction; the closest related ground requires a court conviction for immoral or illegal use of the premises, and any eviction still requires a court order rather than unilateral landlord action.
