The Supreme Court has scheduled December 18, 2024, to deliver its judgment on the two suits challenging the constitutionality of the anti-gay bill. The Human and Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, popularly known as the anti-gay bill, was challenged by Richard Dela Sky.
The case, which has been pending since May 2024, faced criticism from proponents of the bill, who accused the Chief Justice of delaying its resolution. However, the Judicial Service clarified that the delay was due to the failure of the parties to submit the necessary documents to advance the case.
A seven-member panel of the apex court, which had Justice Avril Lovelace Johnson as President, fixed the date after granting leave to lawyers for Richard Sky to amend their statement of case within two days. They also asked their defendants to file their response by November 27, 2024.
The other members of the panel are Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Barbara Ackah-Yensu, Samuel Asiedu, Ernest Gaewu, Yaw Asare Darko, and Richard Adjei-Frimpong. The Speaker of Parliament and the Attorney General were previously granted leave by the court to file their defenses.
At a hearing last Tuesday, the court allowed the applicant to amend parts of his statement of case, granting the defendants the opportunity to respond.
Following this, the court adjourned the matter, setting December 18 for its ruling.
About the Anti-LGBTQI Bill
On February 28, 2024, Parliament passed the Human and Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, which was a bi-partisan private member’s bill. If assented to by the President, the bill, which enjoyed the support of members of the House, will impose a year’s minimum jail term and five years maximum incarceration on those who engage in and promote homosexual activities in Ghana.
It has thus criminalized and prohibited pro-gay advocacy, as well as those who fund the activities of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and and intersex. The plaintiff went to the Supreme Court shortly after the bill was passed, with a case that violated Article 108 of the 1992 Constitution.
Article 108 of the 1992 Constitution stipulates that any bill before Parliament that would have an impact on the consolidated fund should be introduced by or on behalf of the President.
It further stipulates that in the event a bill is introduced by any entity other than the President or on behalf of the President. The person presiding in Parliament must give an opinion on whether the bill would have an impact on the consolidated fund before it is laid before Parliament.
It is therefore the contention of the plaintiff that the anti-gay bill failed to follow the dictates of Article 108 of the 1992 Constitution.
