Anti-gay Bill: Until a Bill is assented to by the president nobody has any business to take it to court – Speaker

The Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin has said that there is no business for anybody including a court to consider a bill that is yet to be assented to by the President.

The speaker said he is being served with writs as a party on matters that are being considered by the House on a daily basis and further served notices that if this trend is not stopped the work of lawmakers will be of no consequence.

Speaking in Parliament on Wednesday, July 3, Mr. Bagbin indicated that ” When it comes to lawmaking until all the processes in this house are exhausted, there is no business for anybody including a court to consider because the Constitution, as the enabling legislation, takes care of all these challenges. Until it is a law, it is assented to by the President judiciary has no jurisdiction to try to find into it.

“This is noteworthy, we have to take this seriously or else our legislative authority is being taken away from us by other agencies and arms of government, that should be resisted by this house, or else your being here is of no consequence.

“The law is very clear on this and so until a bill is assented to by the president nobody has any business to take that process that is being considered by the House to the court, I don’t want to preempt the judgment of the Supreme Court in this matter but I have given notice because on daily basis I am being served with writs as party on matters that are being considered by the House, that is why I am compelled to say this.”

His comments come at a time when the Supreme Court has scheduled July 17, 2024, to rule on Dr. Amanda Odoi’s application for an interlocutory injunction against the transmission of the anti-gay bill to the presidency by Parliament.

On the same day, the court will also address an application filed by media personality and lawyer Richard Dela Sky.

This announcement follows arguments from the plaintiffs’ lawyers, the Attorney- General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, and Thaddeus Sory, counsel for the Speaker of Parliament.

Delivering the closing remarks after today’s hearing, the 5-member panel, chaired by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, emphasized that the court will issue separate rulings for the two cases.

The panel includes Justice Mariama Owusu, Justice Prof. Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Justice Ernest Gaewu, and Justice Yaw Darko Asare.

There are currently two lawsuits before the Supreme Court challenging the passage of the anti-LGBTQ+ bill passed by Parliament.

Richard Dela Sky is challenging the constitutionality of Parliament’s passage of the “Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill.”

He argues that the bill violates several provisions of the 1992 Constitution, including Article 33(5) and Articles 12(1) and (2), 15(1), 17(1) and (2), 18(2), and 21(1)(a)(b)(d) and (e).

Sky is seeking eight reliefs, including an order declaring that the Speaker of Parliament contravened Article 108(a)(ii) of the Constitution by allowing Parliament to pass the bill, which imposes a charge on the Consolidated Fund or other public funds of Ghana.

Dr. Amanda Odoi has raised concerns about specific provisions within the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill.

She is seeking a restraining order to prevent the Speaker, the Attorney-General, and the Clerk of Parliament from sending the bill to President Akufo-Addo for approval.