The Supreme Court has decided not to grant an injunction that would have prevented a law that would have criminalised LGBTQ+ individuals from moving forward in the legislative process.
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023, a panel of nine justices led by the Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo came to the conclusion that the petitioner, Dr. Amanda Odoi, did not submit adequate evidence to validate her prayer. This result was reached in a unanimous vote by the panel.
While delivering the verdict of the court, Justice Torkornoo emphasised that the court had not been persuaded to impose an injunction on an ongoing legislative process in parliament because it was not yet complete.
As a direct result of this, Dr. Amanda Odoi's legal team decided not to pursue a contempt of court charge against Speaker Alban Bagbin.
Dr. Odoi, a well-known researcher, filed a lawsuit against Mr. Bagbin and accused him of contempt for enabling the legislature to move through with the contentious anti-LGBTQ+ measure despite the fact that legal challenges were still pending.
In the complaint, Mr. Bagbin was accused of disregarding the court's proceedings, and sanctions were sought against him as a result.
Dr. Odoi claimed that the conduct of the Speaker reflect a blatant disregard not only for the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana from 1992 but also for the procedure of the court.
In the court filings, emphasis was placed on the Speaker's frequent infractions as well as his complete and utter contempt for these fundamental components of the legal framework of the country.
The documents additionally argued that Mr. Bagbin's deliberate and ongoing disdain for the court process justified sanctions for contempt in order to sustain the dignity of the court and to protect the public interest.
They pointed out that Mr. Bagbin had shown disrespect for the authority of the court by directing or forcing parliament to proceed with the bill's Second Reading despite being aware of the pending lawsuit and related interlocutory injunction application. This was done despite the fact that Mr. Bagbin was aware of the pending lawsuit and related interlocutory injunction application.
Regarding the anti-LGBTQ+ bill, Dr. Odoi's legal action was one of two that were brought against the Speaker of Parliament and the Attorney General by private persons.
A heated debate and controversy have been ignited by the law, with various parties voicing their differing perspectives on the merits and ramifications of the bill.
This most recent turn of events intensifies the continuing dialogue surrounding the anti-LGBTQ+ law, as its supporters and opponents continue to struggle with the potential repercussions and the impact the proposed legislation could have on society.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0