Ghana’s Anti-LGBTQI+ Bill Advances to Second Reading in Parliament: A Detailed Overview

On February 10, 2025, a significant and controversial legislative development occurred in Ghana. The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Bagbin, directed the Business Committee to schedule the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, 2025—commonly known as the Anti-LGBTQI+ Bill—for debate. This action formally laid the bill for its second reading in the House. This move clears a primary procedural hurdle, allowing the full parliament to engage in substantive debate and potential voting on the proposed law, which seeks to criminalize LGBTQ+ advocacy and identity in Ghana. This article provides a clear, factual, and SEO-optimized breakdown of the bill’s journey, its contents, the surrounding controversy, and what it means for Ghana.

Introduction: The Path to Second Reading

The reintroduction and advancement of the Anti-LGBTQI+ Bill mark a critical juncture in Ghana’s legislative and human rights landscape. After a previous version faced legal obstacles and could not be passed in the prior parliamentary session, the bill’s sponsors have successfully navigated initial procedural reviews to bring it before the Ninth Parliament once more. Speaker Bagbin’s directive on February 10, 2025, was based on a determination that the bill met the constitutional and procedural requirements for a private member’s bill, as outlined in the Standing Orders of Parliament and Article 108 of the 1992 Constitution. This sets the stage for a full parliamentary debate, where the bill’s future—whether to be enacted into law or rejected—will be decided by elected representatives.

Key Points: What You Need to Know

• Bill Status: The “Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, 2025” has been formally laid for its second reading in Ghana’s Parliament.
• Procedural Green Light: Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin confirmed the bill complies with constitutional requirements (Article 108) and parliamentary Standing Orders (187[2]) for reintroduction.
• Review Process: The bill was reviewed by the Committee on Private Members’ Bills and the Office of the Attorney-General. Both bodies have submitted reports, with the committee unanimously recommending its presentation to the House.
• Historical Context: This is a reintroduction. A previous version of the bill faced strong opposition and legal challenges, preventing its passage in the last parliamentary term.
• Content Focus: The bill proposes to criminalize the advocacy, promotion, and public identification with LGBTQ+ activities, as well as impose penalties for “unwanted” sexual advances, with sentences ranging from fines to lengthy imprisonment.
• Next Steps: Following the second reading, the bill will proceed to a consideration/report stage for clause-by-clause scrutiny, and then a third reading for final approval before potential assent by the President.

Background: Legislative History and Constitutional Framework

The Bill’s Origins and Previous Journey

The legislative push for what is termed a “family values” bill is not new. Its roots trace back to 2021 when a similar private member’s bill was first introduced. That version generated intense national and international debate, drawing criticism from human rights organizations, diplomatic missions, and civil society groups who argued it violated fundamental rights. The bill also faced immediate legal challenges. In the previous parliament, despite passing a first reading, it could not complete its journey due to these lawsuits and the dissolution of that parliamentary session before final passage.

Reintroduction in the Ninth Parliament

Following the election of the Ninth Parliament in December 2024, the bill’s sponsors—a coalition of conservative MPs—moved to reintroduce it. On January 28, 2025, Speaker Bagbin, exercising his constitutional duty under Standing Order 187(2), referred the bill to the Attorney-General’s Office and the Ministry of Justice for a formal review. This review assesses whether the bill is consistent with the Constitution, particularly regarding the separation of powers and the scope of permissible legislation by private members.

The Attorney-General’s Review

The Office of the Attorney-General, Ghana’s chief legal advisor, submitted its observations on the bill on April 7, 2025. While the full content of these observations is not publicly detailed, the fact that the bill was subsequently forwarded back to its sponsors indicates the AG’s office did not identify fatal constitutional defects that would block its reintroduction. The bill’s sponsors then addressed any technical or drafting concerns raised.

Committee on Private Members’ Bills

The bill was then channeled to the parliamentary Committee on Private Members’ Bills and Private Members’ Motions. This committee is responsible for scrutinizing the procedural and substantive compliance of such bills. On [Date of Committee Report – to be inserted if known, otherwise generalize], the committee conducted its review and unanimously recommended that the bill be presented to the plenary House for debate. This unanimous committee endorsement was a crucial step, providing the Speaker with the necessary committee report to make his final determination on laying the bill.

Analysis: Provisions, Controversy, and Legal Landscape

Key Proposed Provisions of the Bill

While the final 2025 version may have minor drafting changes from the prior text, the core provisions remain consistent with previous drafts. The bill seeks to:

• Criminalize LGBTQ+ Identity and Conduct: It proposes to make “identifying as” or “engaging in” same-sex relations a criminal offense, punishable by imprisonment.
• Ban Advocacy and Promotion: It would outlaw any public advocacy, fundraising, or distribution of material perceived to promote LGBTQ+ rights, with severe penalties including lengthy jail terms (reportedly up to 5-10 years).
• Curb “Unwanted” Sexual Advances: It contains provisions criminalizing “unwanted” sexual advances, which critics argue could be weaponized against LGBTQ+ individuals and used to conflate consensual same-sex relations with harassment.
• Impact on Healthcare and Support: The broad definitions of “promotion” could criminalize essential public health work, including HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs targeting