"I Will Burn Myself Live On Camera If Akufo-Addo Lives To March 2026" - Solomon Owusu

 

A fiery and deeply controversial statement has ignited national debate after political commentator Solomon Owusu made an extreme declaration during a televised interview, linking the future of former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo to his own life in what many observers have described as reckless, dangerous, and deeply troubling rhetoric.

Speaking during a live interview aired on TV3, Solomon Owusu claimed that the former president bears overwhelming responsibility for what he described as the suffering of Ghanaians under the previous administration. In an emotionally charged outburst, Owusu stated that if Akufo-Addo remains a free man beyond March 2026, he would take drastic personal action on camera comments that immediately triggered shock, condemnation, and concern across political and civil society circles.

Owusu argued that, in his view, the scale of alleged wrongdoing under the Akufo-Addo administration is so extensive that it no longer requires further investigation. According to him, the evidence is already visible in the public domain, citing what he called “clear national scandals” as justification for his position. Among the issues he referenced were the National Cathedral project, which has been dogged by allegations of financial opacity and cost overruns, and matters involving former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta, whose tenure has been marked by intense public scrutiny, parliamentary probes, and ongoing legal controversies.

“The sins committed against Ghanaians under Akufo-Addo’s watch are too many,” Owusu said during the interview. He claimed that economic hardship, rising debt, unemployment, and alleged corruption combined to create unprecedented suffering for ordinary citizens. In his view, accountability is not optional but inevitable, and any delay in prosecuting former leaders represents a failure of justice.

Owusu’s remarks went beyond political critique, however, crossing into dangerous territory that has alarmed many viewers. Media analysts, mental health advocates, and political commentators have since warned that such statements risk normalising extreme behaviour and undermining responsible public discourse. Several have stressed that while anger and frustration are understandable in a charged political environment, self-harm threats, whether symbolic or literal are never acceptable tools of political expression.

The comments have also reignited wider debate about accountability for former government officials. Since the change in administration, public attention has increasingly focused on whether individuals who served in the previous government will face prosecution, inquiries, or asset recovery processes. Issues surrounding the National Cathedral, debt management, procurement decisions, and alleged financial improprieties continue to dominate political discussions, with many Ghanaians demanding transparency and justice.

However, legal experts caution that accountability must follow due process. They argue that even in cases where wrongdoing appears evident, the rule of law requires thorough investigation, evidence gathering, and fair trials. Several lawyers and civil society organisations have warned against trial-by-public-opinion, noting that justice achieved through lawful procedures is the only way to ensure legitimacy and national stability.

Reactions to Owusu’s statement have been sharply divided. Some social media users echoed his frustration, interpreting his remarks as an expression of deep public anger rather than a literal threat. Others condemned the statement outright, calling it irresponsible and urging TV stations and commentators to exercise restraint and ethical judgment in political discussions.

TV3 itself has since faced calls from media watchdogs to reinforce editorial standards during live interviews, particularly when guests make inflammatory or potentially harmful statements. Mental health professionals have also used the moment to remind the public that threats of self-harm should always be taken seriously and addressed with care, not amplified for political point-scoring.

As Ghana continues to navigate a tense post-election environment, the incident underscores the emotional intensity surrounding issues of governance, accountability, and justice. While many citizens demand answers and consequences for alleged misconduct, the episode serves as a stark reminder that political debate must remain grounded in responsibility, legality, and respect for human life.

Whether Solomon Owusu will retract or clarify his remarks remains unclear. What is certain, however, is that his statement has intensified national conversations not only about the legacy of the Akufo-Addo administration, but also about the tone, limits, and dangers of political discourse in Ghana’s democracy.