Ghana’s Anti-LGBTQ Bill: A Detailed Guide to the Parliamentary Process and Constitutional Scrutiny

Introduction: The Reintroduction of a Controversial Legislative Proposal

On February 10, 2025, the Speaker of the Parliament of Ghana, Alban Sumana Bagbin, made a pivotal procedural announcement that reignited national and international discourse. He directed the Business Committee to schedule the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025—commonly referred to as the Anti-LGBTQ Bill—for consideration by the full House. This directive was not an arbitrary act but the culmination of a strict, constitutionally mandated review process. The Speaker’s communication confirmed that the bill, in his opinion, satisfied all necessary constitutional and procedural requirements for reintroduction under Parliament’s Standing Orders.

This action sets the stage for the bill’s second formal passage through the legislature, following its initial journey in the Eighth Parliament which ended without presidential assent. For observers, activists, legal experts, and citizens, understanding the mechanics behind this move is crucial. This article provides a clear, pedagogical breakdown of the parliamentary procedures involved, the constitutional checks performed, the bill’s historical context, and the potential pathways and implications ahead. We will navigate the complex intersection of Ghanaian legislative practice, constitutional law, and socio-political debate surrounding LGBTQ+ rights in the country.

Key Points: What You Need to Know

• Directive Issued: Speaker Alban Bagbin has formally instructed the Business Committee to place the Anti-LGBTQ Bill on the parliamentary agenda.
• Constitutional Compliance: The Speaker’s decision is based on a finding that the bill complies with Article 108 of the 1992 Constitution regarding financial provisions and does not contravene other cited articles.
• Bill’s History: This is a reintroduction. The identical bill was passed by the Eighth Parliament in February 2024 but lapsed upon Parliament’s dissolution because it did not receive presidential assent.
• Sponsorship: Nine (9) Members of Parliament have formally expressed their intention to reintroduce the bill.
• Mandatory Reviews: The bill underwent reviews by the Committee on Private Members’ Bills and received a legal opinion and fiscal impact analysis, all of which supported its presentation.
• Next Step: The bill must now be scheduled by the Business Committee for a first reading and subsequent debate in the plenary session of the Ninth Parliament.

Background: The Bill’s Origin and Its First Parliamentary Journey

The Genesis: The 2021 Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill

The legislative proposal first emerged in August 2021 as the “Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2021.” It was a private member’s bill, meaning it was introduced by individual MPs rather than the executive government. Its stated objective is to “promote and protect proper human sexual rights and family values” and to “prohibit the promotion, advocacy, funding, and act of homosexuality and related activities.” The bill defines “homosexual” and “LGBTQ+” activities as acts of “sexual deviance” and proposes severe penalties, including lengthy prison sentences, for individuals who engage in same-sex sexual acts, identify as LGBTQ+, or advocate for LGBTQ+ rights.

Passage in the Eighth Parliament and Presidential Inaction

The bill proceeded through the committee and plenary stages of the Eighth Parliament. On February 28, 2024, it was passed by a significant majority. However, under Ghana’s constitution, a bill passed by Parliament must be presented to the President for assent to become law. The President has a specified period to either assent, withhold assent, or return the bill with recommendations. In this instance, the bill was not assented to. Consequently, when the Eighth Parliament was dissolved on the night of January 6, 2025, ahead of the inauguration of the Ninth Parliament, all pending business that had not concluded, including this bill, lapsed. This is a standard constitutional consequence of parliamentary dissolution.

Analysis: The Constitutional and Procedural Pathway to Reintroduction

The Speaker’s February 10, 2025, directive is the product of a legally prescribed process for the reintroduction of a lapsed private member’s bill. This process is designed to ensure rigorous scrutiny before a bill re-enters the parliamentary chamber. Here is a step-by-step analysis of the required steps and the findings at each stage.

1. The Trigger: Article 108 and Standing Order 187(2)

The entire review hinges on Article 108 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. This article states that a bill shall not be introduced in Parliament if it imposes a tax or a charge on the Consolidated Fund or alters the same otherwise than by a reduction. The Speaker has a constitutional duty, under Standing Order 187(2), to communicate to the House his opinion on whether a private member’s bill complies with this financial provision. The Speaker’s announcement explicitly stated he had formed the opinion that the bill “does not impose or alter taxation or a charge on the Consolidated Fund”. This is a critical preliminary hurdle that has been cleared.

2. Referral for Executive Review: The Attorney-General’s Role

Following the inauguration of the Ninth Parliament, Speaker Bagbin, exercising his procedural authority, referred the bill to the Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice on January 28, 2025. This referral is for a comprehensive legal review to assess the bill’s consistency with the constitution and existing laws. The Attorney-General’s office submitted its formal observations on April 7, 2025. These observations were then forwarded to the bill’s sponsors, allowing them to address any legal concerns raised by the executive’s legal advisor.

3. The Committee on Private Members’ Bills: Unanimous Recommendation

The bill was then systematically reviewed by the Committee on Private Members’ Bills and Private Members’ Motions. This specialized committee is tasked with examining the form, content, and constitutionality of such bills. The committee conducted its review and submitted a report. Speaker Bagbin relayed the committee’s key findings:

• The bill maintains its underlying principles and core objectives.
• It does not contravene any constitutional provision, specifically citing Articles 106 and 108. (Article 106 deals with the passage of bills and presidential assent, while 108, as noted, deals with financial charges).
• It does not impose taxation or a charge on the Consolidated Fund.

The committee’s recommendation to present the bill to the House was unanimous, a significant procedural endorsement.

4. The Speaker’s Final Adjudication

Armed with the committee’s report, the Attorney-General’s observations, and the required legal opinion (dated March 7, 2025) and fiscal impact statement (under Section 101(1) of the Public Financial Management Act, 2016), the Speaker performed his final review. He concurred with the committee’s assessment. His communication to the House was his formal, binding opinion that the bill is procedurally and constitutionally sound for reintroduction. This opinion is not easily challenged within Parliament and triggers the next step: scheduling.

5. The Sponsors: Nine MPs Reaffirm Commitment

For a private member’s bill to proceed, it must have sponsors. Speaker Bagbin noted that by correspondence dated February 25, 2025, nine Members of Parliament had indicated their desire to reintroduce the bill. The list includes Sam Nartey George, Emmanuel Kwesi Bedzrah, Rev. John Ntim Fordjour, Helen Ntoso, Vincent Ekow Assafuah, Alhassan Tampuli Sulemana, Rita Naa Odoley Sowah, Mahama Tiah Abdul-Kabiru, and Anthony Mmieh. This multi-party sponsorship (though primarily from the majority New Patriotic Party and some minority National Democratic Congress members) demonstrates continued political will behind the proposal.

Practical Advice: Understanding the Process and How to Engage

For citizens, civil society organizations, and international observers, the Speaker’s directive is a procedural milestone, not the final legislative outcome. Here is practical guidance on what happens next and how different stakeholders can engage within Ghana’s democratic framework.

For the General Public and Civil Society:

• Track the Business Committee: The immediate next step is scheduling by the Business Committee, a body that sets the parliamentary agenda. Monitor its meetings and announcements for the bill’s first reading date.
• Engage Your MP: Constituents have the right to petition and communicate with their elected representatives. Whether in support or opposition, articulate your views on the bill’s potential social, health, and human rights impacts to your Member of Parliament before and during the debate.
• Public Education: Organizations can conduct evidence-based public education on the bill’s provisions, its potential consequences for public health (e.g., HIV prevention efforts), social cohesion, and Ghana’s international reputation and obligations under treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
• Peaceful Advocacy: Any protests or demonstrations must be conducted within the law, with proper notification to authorities, to ensure safety and legitimate expression of views.

For Legal and Human Rights Professionals:

• Constitutional Challenge: If the bill passes Parliament, the most likely legal battleground will be the Supreme Court. A challenge would likely argue that the bill violates several constitutional provisions beyond Article 108, including the right to privacy (Article 17(2)), freedom of expression and association (Article 21), and the principle of non-discrimination (Article 17(1)). Preparing such a challenge requires meticulous documentation of how specific clauses infringe on these rights.
• Drafting Amicus Curiae Briefs: International and local human rights organizations can prepare detailed legal briefs for the Court, drawing on comparative jurisprudence from African regional courts (like the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights) and other constitutional democracies that have struck down similar punitive laws.
• Monitor Committee Stage: The bill will be sent to a relevant sectoral committee (likely the Justice or Gender Committee) for detailed clause-by-clause review. This is a critical window for proposing amendments to soften punitive provisions or remove unconstitutional elements.

For International Partners and Diplomatic Missions:

• Diplomatic Engagement: Consistent, principled, and evidence-based diplomatic engagement with Ghanaian government officials, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and parliamentary leadership, remains essential. Messages should be clear about the bill’s incompatibility with international human rights standards and its potential to harm development cooperation.
• Support Local Civil Society: Provide funding and capacity-building support to Ghanaian NGOs working on human rights, public health, and democratic governance to strengthen their advocacy, legal, and monitoring capabilities.
• Conditionality Clarity: If considering programmatic conditionality related to human rights, ensure frameworks are transparent, legally sound, and communicated clearly to avoid perceptions of neo-colonial interference, while firmly upholding universal human rights principles.

FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions About the Bill’s Reintroduction

Q1: Does the Speaker’s directive mean the Anti-LGBTQ Bill is now law?

A1: Absolutely not. The Speaker’s directive is a procedural step. It means the bill has passed the initial constitutional and procedural gatekeeping tests and is now eligible to be placed on the parliamentary agenda for debate and potential passage. It must still be read a first, second, and third time in the plenary, pass each stage, and then be presented to the President for assent. The process is long and the outcome uncertain.

Q2: What exactly does “complies with Article 108” mean in this context?

A2: Article 108 prohibits a private member’s bill from imposing or altering a tax or charge on the Consolidated Fund (the government’s main bank account). The Speaker, advised by the committee and legal opinions, has determined that the Anti-LGBTQ Bill, despite its severe penal clauses (fines and imprisonment), does not, in its financial mechanism, constitute a “charge” on the Consolidated Fund in the constitutional sense. This is a technical, legal interpretation focusing on how revenue is raised for the state, not on the severity of fines within the bill.

Q3: What are the key penalties proposed in the bill?

A3: While the exact text of the 2025 version is identical to the 2021 bill that lapsed, that version proposed:

• For “aggravated homosexuality”: Up to 10 years imprisonment (this includes acts with minors, non-consent, or by a person with HIV).
• For “homosexual acts”: Up to 5 years imprisonment.
• For promoting, advocating, or funding LGBTQ+ activities: Up to 5 years imprisonment.
• For public display of same-sex relationships: Up to 1 year imprisonment.
• For a “gender-transitive” person marrying: Up to 3 years imprisonment.

The bill also sought to criminalize the provision of “aid, abetment, counseling, or encouragement” to LGBTQ+ individuals. These provisions are widely viewed by human rights bodies as violating rights to privacy, expression, and non-discrimination.

Q4: Can the President refuse assent again if it passes this time?

A4: Yes. The President retains the constitutional power to either assent to the bill or withhold assent. The President’s reasons for withholding assent in the previous Parliament were not publicly detailed in the context of this specific bill. If the bill passes the Ninth Parliament, the President will again have the opportunity to review it. A second presidential veto would be a significant political event and could potentially trigger different parliamentary dynamics, though the constitution does not provide for an override of a presidential veto on a private member’s bill in the same way as for government bills.

Q5: What are the potential legal implications if this bill becomes law?

A5: If enacted, the law would immediately criminalize a wide range of identity and expressive conduct. The legal implications include:

• Criminal Prosecutions: Law enforcement could arrest and prosecute individuals for sexual conduct, public displays of affection, or even statements supporting LGBTQ+ equality.
• Chilling Effect: The “promotion” clauses would create a severe chilling effect on free speech, association, and assembly for LGBTQ+ individuals and allies, including health workers, activists, and journalists.
• Constitutional Litigation: The law would face immediate and likely sustained legal challenges in the Supreme Court, arguing violations of multiple fundamental rights. This would create a period of legal uncertainty.
• International Law: Ghana would be in clear violation of its obligations under international human rights treaties it has ratified, including the ICC