Journalist Richard Dela Sky
One of the petitioners who filed separate court actions to challenge the passage of the anti-LGBTQ+ bill by the Parliament of Ghana has served notice of his intent to go back to the Supreme Court if the bill receives presidential assent in its current form.
According to broadcast journalist Richard Dela Sky, he is likely to go back to court despite having his earlier application thrown out by the apex court.
“…a decision will be taken on Friday after reviewing the judgment fully with my lawyers; we will go from there. But let me serve notice, however, that if this bill in its current form becomes law, there is no doubt in my mind that I will go back to court.
“Because the central issues that underpin or anchored my litigation have not been resolved,” he stated in an interview on Channel One News on Wednesday, December 18, 2024, following the ruling by the court.
Two suits were filed against the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, over the passage of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, commonly known as the anti-gay bill.
Both suits, which were filed by broadcast journalist Richard Dela Sky and Dr. Amanda Odoi, a researcher at the University of Cape Coast (UCC), sought to have the court nullify the passage of the bill.
According to the two plaintiffs, the passage of the anti-gay bill did not follow the required constitutional procedures.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday, December 18, 2024, dismissed both petitions on the grounds that the bill had not yet become law.
The seven-member Supreme Court panel, chaired by Justice Lovelace Avril Johnson, unanimously dismissed the petitions, stating that until a bill receives presidential assent, it does not constitute an enactment subject to judicial review of its constitutionality.
“The supposed interpretative jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is as yet premature, as there is nothing on which to hang the exercise of the judicial review jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
“The Constitution itself has prescribed the mode by which an enactment, properly so called, can come into being, and by the principle of separation of powers, those processes must be exhausted to produce a tangible product that can have legal effect when properly assented to by the President, the Head of the Executive,” Justice Avril Johnson said as she read the judgment of the court.
She added, “Until there is presidential assent, there is no Act of Parliament over which the Supreme Court can exercise its original jurisdiction to strike down if found to be inconsistent with the Constitution, 1992. The plaintiffs’ action is therefore dismissed.”
The other members of the panel include Justice Samuel Asiedu, Justice Ernest Gawu, Justice Barbara Ackah-Yensu, Justice Adjei Frimpong, and Justice Yaw Darko Asare.
The Parliament of Ghana, on Wednesday, February 28, 2024, passed the Promotion of Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, widely known as the Anti-LGBT+ Bill.
The bill, currently awaiting presidential assent, outlaws Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) activities and criminalizes their promotion, advocacy, and funding.
Persons caught in these acts will be subjected to a six-month to three-year jail term, with promoters and sponsors facing a three to five-year jail term.
The bill now requires presidential assent to come into force within seven days. However, if President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo refuses to assent to the bill, Parliament, by a two-thirds majority vote, can pass it into law.
The Office of the President has instructed the Parliament of Ghana not to attempt to transmit the anti-gay bill until the two legal actions against its passage in the Supreme Court are resolved.
The Speaker of Parliament, at a recent media engagement, ordered the Clerk of Parliament to transmit the bill to the President for him to make a decision on while accusing the executive and the judiciary of conniving to undermine the authority of Parliament.
GA
Watch as Parliament pays tribute to late Ghanaian boxing legend Clement Ike Quartey Snr
