A Married Woman Secretly Invites Lover to Have Fun at Night Before Husband Did the Unexpected

In an official Facebook post dated May 22, 2026, Ghanaian journalist Erastus Asare Donkor drew a clear distinction between freedom of expression and threats to national security, stressing that calls for violence against a president cannot be defended under free speech.

😆

In the post, Donkor emphasized that while democracy guarantees citizens the right to express opinions and criticize leadership, such rights do not extend to incitement or threats against the life of a sitting president.

According to him, statements encouraging violence against national leaders should be treated as serious security matters rather than ordinary political commentary.

He wrote: “If you say ‘please kill the President for us,’ that is not free speech, that is a national security concern that demands your immediate arrest!!”

Donkor’s statement highlighted concerns about the misuse of free speech arguments within political discussions, particularly on social media where inflammatory comments and threats have become increasingly common.

He stressed that freedom of expression carries responsibilities and must not be used as a shield for incitement to violence or actions capable of threatening peace, stability, and human life.

The journalist further suggested that democratic societies can only function properly when citizens understand the difference between lawful criticism and criminal incitement. 

According to him, criticism of government policies, leaders, and institutions remains a legitimate democratic right, but threats against public officials cross legal and moral boundaries.

His comments also reinforced the role of law enforcement and national security agencies in addressing statements considered dangerous to public safety and governance. 

Donkor argued that arrests in such situations should not automatically be interpreted as suppression of free speech but as enforcement of laws designed to protect lives and national institutions.

The post generated reactions online, with many social media users supporting his position and agreeing that threats against presidents or other public officials must be treated seriously regardless of political affiliation.

Others described his comments as timely, especially amid rising political tension and increasingly aggressive rhetoric within public discourse in Ghana and across Africa.

Donkor’s remarks ultimately served as a reminder that although democracy depends on open debate, dissent, and criticism, freedom of expression is not absolute and does not protect incitement to violence or actions capable of destabilizing society.