FDA's restriction on alcohol ads is criticised by Akofa Edjeani
Akofa Edjeani, a seasoned actress, has expressed her disagreement with the recent Supreme Court decision that maintained the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) order prohibiting famous people from endorsing alcoholic products.
Boakyewaa Lawrencia 
"No well-known personality or professional shall be used in alcoholic beverage advertising," according to FDA guidelines established on February 1, 2016, regarding the advertising of alcoholic beverages by public personalities.
According to the FDA, the purpose of this recommendation is to stop celebrities from encouraging young people to drink alcohol.
voicing her worries on 3FM over the FDA's inadequate consultation prior to the directive's implementation.
Edjeani thinks the FDA failed to fully analyse the guidelines' consequences.
It's regrettable, and I fail to see how intelligent people of many backgrounds could have come to this conclusion. It didn't seem like it was well thought out.
Who in our sector did they consult? Whom did they consult before to arriving at this decision? "Advertising is still happening whether it's by a celebrity or not," she said, questioning the reasoning behind the edict. A person will drink if they so choose.
"They should provide proof if they say we're influencing minors," she argued. The FDA added that the prohibition is a component of measures to prevent children and young people from being drawn into alcoholism and that it complies with a World Health Organisation (WHO) policy.
A lawsuit was brought against the FDA directive, claiming that it was unlawful and infringed against the 1992 Constitution's Article 17 protection against discrimination.
On Wednesday, June 19, the Supreme Court rejected the appeal and affirmed the FDA's mandate in a 5-2 majority ruling. The FDA's mandate was found by the court to be neither excessive nor unreasonable, and therefore did not violate any constitutional rights.
