Supreme Court defers ruling on interlocutory injunction against Anti-LGBTQI Bill

The Supreme Court has deferred its ruling on an interlocutory injunction filed by broadcaster, Richard Sky and Researcher, Dr Amanda Odoi, against the transmission of the Anti-LGBTQI to the presidency.

The five-member panel, presided over by the Chief Justice, indicated that it would give the ruling alongside the substantive application and thus called for an expedited trial of the case.

Other members of the panel are Justice Mariama Owusu, Justice Prof Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Justice Ernest Gaewu, and Justice Yaw Darko Asare.

Richard Dela Sky avers that the bill passed by Parliament contravenes various articles of the constitution and thus should be declared null or void. 

He is thus seeking an injunction barring any attempts to enforce the provisions of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2024 particularly those criminalizing same-sex relationships and related advocacy efforts.

On her part, Dr Amanda Odoi is specifically seeking an interlocutory injunction to restrain the Speaker of Parliament, Clerk, etc. from forwarding the bill to the president for his assent pending the final determination of the suit.

At the last sitting, the two applicants filed their respective motions for interlocutory injunctions directed at the Speaker of Parliament.

The lawyer for the researcher told the panel chaired by the Chief Justice that Parliament failed to do a fiscal impact analysis despite being advised by the Attorney General and thus sinned against Article 108 of the Constitution and Chapter Five on fundamental human rights.

Counsel, Dr Ernest Arko thus insisted that the Legislature ought to be injuncted from transmitting the bill to the president for his assent.

On his part, the lawyer for Richard Sky agreed with all the above grounds adding that an injunction will safeguard the Constitution and the ordinary citizens.

The Attorney General, Godfred Dame indicated that Article 108 is a prerequisite in passing a bill with financial constrain on the consolidated fund and thus the Speaker ought not to have violated it when he presided over the process.

The AG asserted that the omission by the legislature is a very grave constitutional error that ought not be allowed by the court to stand.

In response to the Speaker’s lawyer, Mr Dame retorted that such an omission can be cured by the president’s election to send the bill back to parliament for correction.

Mr Sory, who is the lawyer for the Speaker of Parliament, indicated that the application of the first applicant is the same as was previously brought before the court and dismissed.

He thus impressed upon the court to follow its previous decision insisting that there is no such violation by Parliament as being alleged by the applicants.

Also, the Speaker’s lawyer said that the legislative process only comes to an end when the president signs a bill and that Injuncting Parliament at this point may lead to injuncting something that may not become law if the president refuses to sign afterward.

Background

On February 28, 2024, the Parliament of Ghana passed the Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values (“Anti-LGBTQ”) Bill. 

The bill is yet to be forwarded to H.E., the President, for assent, but the bill's passage has triggered reactions from some of Ghana’s development partners, international financial institutions, and CSOs in the country.

It is on the back of this that two people, a lawyer; Richard Sky, and a researcher; Dr. Amanda Odoi, have filed these suits.