Ghana's President Nana Akufo-Addo has decided to delay any action on a contentious anti-LGBTQ bill until the Supreme Court rules on its constitutionality. This decision comes after journalist Richard Sky and researcher Dr. Amanda Odoi filed applications seeking to halt the bill's progress. They argue that the proposed legislation violates the constitutional rights of Ghanaians.
The "Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2024" aims to criminalize LGBTQ activities. Individuals found guilty of engaging in such activities could face imprisonment ranging from six months to three years. Additionally, promoting or advertising LGBTQ activities via technology, social media, or traditional media could result in up to ten years in prison. The bill also proposes fines for those sponsoring LGBTQ activities, with penalties ranging from 9,000 to 60,000 Ghana cedis ($720 to $4,800).
In March, President Akufo-Addo stated he would not sign the bill while legal challenges are ongoing. He emphasized the importance of allowing the judicial process to proceed, highlighting the role of Ghana's institutions in upholding the rule of law and human rights.
The president's office communicated this stance to parliament, instructing them to hold off on transmitting the bill until the court's decision is reached. The letter, signed by the president's secretary, Nana Asante Bediatuo, underlined the impropriety of advancing the bill amidst pending court cases.
Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin expressed frustration over the president's refusal to accept the bill, describing the action as lacking constitutional backing. Bagbin warned that parliament might retaliate by blocking the approval of newly appointed ministers, reflecting the growing tension between the legislative and executive branches.
The speaker argued that the president's decision disrupts the legislative process and challenges the authority of parliament. This discord highlights the complex interplay between Ghana's branches of government as they navigate this controversial issue.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the injunction applications, determining whether parliament can forward the bill to the president for his signature. If the court rules against the bill, it may halt its progression entirely. However, a decision in favor of the bill could allow it to proceed to the president, pending further legal review.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0