Ghana’s Parliament passes anti-LGBTQ++ bill, international watchers go bonkers

Listen to this article Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

“I’m going to put the question…I’m going to put a question…. I’m going to put the question that the motion has been moved and seconded and I left it for your consideration, you made your point and it’s not for me to take the decisions.

It’s for the House to take the decisions and so I put the question; that the those in favour that the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2021 be taken through the third reading, say aye..( loud response of aye) those against, say no ( silence). Honourable members, the ayes have it. The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2021 is read the third time and passed ”.

That was how Ghana’s Parliament passed one of the most controversial bills in the country’s history; should I say that this probably would be the second after that tax bill that paved way for the Value Added Tax leading to the current President, Nana Addo Danquah Akufo-Addo to hit the streets in protest; the Kume preko demonstration of 1995.

Interestingly, Mr. Akufo-Addo is in power whilst the country passes a bill that would dominate discussions for days if not weeks or months. The Speaker of Parliament himself, Alban Bagbin prior to the passage had vowed that he would get that bill passed. “I know that nobody in this House is opposed to the bill and I know the bill will see the light of day before we rise because the people of Ghana are expecting us to pass the bill before we go on recess.” He is quoted to have said.

The bill has passed. It did on the 28^th of February, 2024 and international watchers have gone bonkers. The President is now under pressure to make his decision known on whether or not he’s going to sign it so it becomes law. Per legal provisions, the bill will have to be presented to the President for assent. The President will indicate within 7 days after receipt whether he assents to the bill or will not do so. Where the President opts not to assent, he shall within fourteen days state in a memorandum to the Speaker his specific concerns.

Parliament shall then consider the bill taking into account comments by the president. The bill will thereafter be passed with two-thirds approval; in this case, about 183 members of the house. The President must then assent to the bill within 30 days.

The President’s cousin, a renowned Lawyer and leading member of the governing party who retired from active politics recently, well, as he said, Gabby Asare-Otchere Darko might be against it. Oh, sorry. In 2021 when the bill presented to the house had just started gaining public attention, Mr. Asare Otchere-Darko put on his X page that “I am against the anti-gay bill & not shy to say so. I am a proud Ghanaian who cherishes all that is good about our value systems, including tolerance. And, I will defend the right of minorities everywhere. I have the courage and a sense of justice to disagree with the majority.”

Since renowned communications Professor Audrey Gadzekpo of the Centre for Democratic Governance, the CDD-Ghana is asking this bill to be done away with or a possible legal action, just wondering whether one of the closest to the President might whisper in his ears to leave this bill hanging.

Anyway, I have read the twenty plus paged Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Act(bill) or the anti-gay bill and will break it down for you; I mean, the major points in it and why the international community seems to go bonkers on Ghana or should I rather say, they have gone bananas.

Here is a summary of the bill.

• The first few pages give us clarity on who and what specifically the proponents of the bill are talking about, some of the offences plus punishment.
• Section eight says that any person who indulges in ‘’grossly indecent act’’ ie, public show of romantic relations between or among persons of same sex including dressing for this ideology will be punished
• Section nine also makes it clear that even if the individuals involved got their way in getting married out of the jurisdiction of Ghana, that certificate of marriage would not be respected or recognized in Ghana and a person who helps to organize such a marriage would face between one to three years imprisonment.
• People who help publish anything LGBTQI ++ will also face between five to ten years jail term. No person is allowed to help influence public opinion in favour of gay activities.
• Section eleven seems to prioritize the protection of children and bans any sort of impending effort to indoctrinate children in this direction. Those in this category get between six to ten years in prison.
• Section seventeen seems to give some hope to people in the LGBTQI category-legal and medical aid.

 Analysis and Research

The basics

A human rights lawyer may question what right a country has to restrict or prevent someone from choosing what kind of body that person wants to be in in order to exist? What legal provisions are there?

Ghana has made its’ legal position clear with this bill. But critics talk about conventions the country has ratified including Optional Protocols for UN Human Rights Conventions. Opponents of this bill also evoke the letters in chapter five of the country’s 1992 constitution which they say are being grossly disrespected.

For those who are for the bill, the argument of Human Rights is null and void. The landmark judgment given by the highest or most effective Human Rights court in Europe; the European court of human rights in Strasbourg almost 14 years ago is enough to dismiss the argument of homosexuality being a human right. A portion of the court’s judgment read “However, in contrast, all other substantive articles of the Convention grant rights and freedoms to ‘everyone’ or state that ‘no one’ is to be subjected to certain types of prohibited treatment. The choice of wording in article 12 must thus be regarded as deliberate. Moreover, regard must be had to the historical context in which the convention was adopted. In the 1950s marriage was clearly understood in the traditional sense of being a union between partners of different sex.”

The time and other circumstantial evidences may call for further arguments. But what do doctors says about whether or not homosexuality is a right or a lifestyle or even nature, as in people being born that way?

An extract of an article published on scientificamerican.com ‘’ Few aspects of human biology are as complex—or politically fraught—as sexual orientation. A clear genetic link would suggest that gay people are “born this way,” as opposed to having made a lifestyle choice. Yet some fear that such a finding could be misused “cure” homosexuality, and most research teams have shied away from tackling the topic.

Now, a new study claims to dispel the notion that a single gene or handful of genes make a person prone to same-sex behavior. The analysis, which examined the genomes of nearly half a million men and women, found that although genetics are certainly involved in who people choose to have sex with, there are no specific genetic predictors…’’

There are lots of argument on this LGBTQ conversation those supposedly from Science and pseudoscience. Whilst some scientists claim science is still trying to figure this out, others don’t want to hear about it, outrightly dismissing such talks. I will not go deeply into this.

But back to Ghana and this bill making headlines, it appears that the crux of this bill may lie in section 8 found on page 9 of this bill. In summary it says ‘’ that any person who indulges in ‘’grossly indecent act’’ ie, public show of romantic relations between or among persons of same sex including dressing for this ideology will be punished. This seems to be one of the major reasons proponents of this bill are passionate about it. They argue that heterosexuals do not flaunt their intimate dealings in the faces of Ghanaians so you too don’t. A CDD-Ghana research on the acceptability or otherwise of homosexuals or what activists call minority group said that 93 percent of people were against the idea of homosexuality….’’ Overwhelming majorities of Ghanaians express tolerant attitudes toward people of different ethnicities (92%), different religions (91%), different political affiliations (90%), and different nationalities (74%). But fewer than one in 10 (7%) are tolerant toward people in same-sex relationships.’’

Reactions

You do not expect this decision to pass through without eyebrows being raised. Here are some reactions.

US Ambassador to Ghana-Virginia E. Palmer

“Legislation that threatens all Ghanaians’ civil rights also threatens Ghana’s economic recovery. As international businesses have already made clear, it will deter critically needed foreign investment across all industries including tourism.”

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk 

“The bill broadens the scope of criminal sanctions against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transexual and queer people – simply for being who they are – and threatens criminal penalties against perceived allies of LGBTQ+ people. I call for the bill not to become law. I urge the Ghanaian Government to take steps to ensure everyone can live free from violence, stigma and discrimination, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Consensual same-sex conduct should never be criminalized’’.

Why this reaction

The international community believes that LBGTQ is a right and all aspects of society must accept it so it’s a bit surprising when it feels that a member it thinks is on course bails out on them like that. It thinks this is backward thinking. For instance, out of the 50 countries in Europe, 33 are at various stages of approval of gay rights.

The other side is, you cannot be claiming to be having cultures against what we believe when you depend on us financially, militarily, etc, for your survival. There are perhaps more.

Final Argument

• People against the LGBTQ question why a sovereign state like Ghana would be dictated to by the US and other international partners on what to accept and not to accept as part of its’ culture. They equally find it hypocritical that the UN protects cultures and yet when it comes to the LGBTQ community that idea seems to be thrown to the dogs.
• For those for the LGBTQ community, countries like Ghana are only being hypocritical. Have they dealt with fornication, robbery, corruption?

Who is the judge over moral decadence? To what extent can society also lose its’ sense of identity? Is it an argument of a few people wanting to impose their ideas on all persons or people are refusing to see that the world is evolving?

You have your say. My name is Beatrice Adu. I will catch up with you again.

Connect on Facebook via Beatrice Adu, on X @Beatrice4Adu, linked in @Beatrice Adu