Samuel Nartey George, Member of Parliament for Ningo-Prampram, has expressed strong disappointment and frustration with the Supreme Court’s decision to postpone its ruling on the anti-gay cases until all related issues are fully resolved.
As the lead advocate for the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, which seeks to outlaw LGBTQ+ activities in Ghana, George has been at the forefront of pushing for the legislation’s passage.
However, the bill has faced numerous legal challenges, including suits filed by private practitioners Richard Dela Sky and Dr. Amanda Odoi, as well as law lecturer Prince Obiri-Korang.
The Supreme Court had initially set July 17, 2024, for its ruling on the matter but made a sudden U-turn, deciding to defer the decision until all counter-suits related to the bill are addressed. This move has sparked widespread frustration among proponents of the legislation.
In an interview on Channel One TV’s “Face to Face” program hosted by Umaru Sanda Amadu, George voiced his discontent with the court’s action. He noted that there are three lawsuits pending, each with its unique challenges to the bill. George explained that the bill is premised on Section 104 of Act 29, and one of the cases actually challenges the constitutionality of that section.
George criticized the Supreme Court for indirectly hindering Parliament’s progress, arguing that the judiciary is stopping the legislature from fulfilling its constitutional mandate as outlined in Article 106/7 of the Constitution.
He lamented the lack of urgency in addressing the main case and the absence of a clear timetable for the hearing.
“The Supreme Court has staged judgments, and nobody knows what’s going on,” George said. “They haven’t given us a timetable; are they hearing it now, one month, or two years? Nobody knows.”
The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Act, 2024, which was approved by Parliament on February 28, 2024, criminalizes LGBTQ+ activities, promotion, advocacy, and funding. Those found guilty could face jail terms ranging from six months to three years, while those promoting and sponsoring such activities could face jail terms between three to five years.
The bill’s passage has been met with resistance from various quarters, including human rights activists and international organizations. However, proponents of the legislation argue that it is necessary to protect Ghanaian values and culture.
As the debate surrounding the bill continues, George’s criticism of the Supreme Court’s decision highlights the growing tensions between the judiciary and legislature in Ghana.
The delay in the ruling has left many wondering about the fate of the legislation and its implications for the country’s human rights record.
