Indecent haste

We all saw how our Parliament organised the debate during the consideration stage of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2025, otherwise popularly known as the Anti- LGBTQ+ Bill. 

The discourse eventually ended with the passage of the Bill, now awaiting presidential assent to become law.

Numerous exemptions, including those suggested to have been smuggled, soured the debate, a dichotomy, deeply embedded in extreme partisanship, manifested in intemperate and vicious innuendo and sarcasm.

The polemics confused Ghanaians, many   of whom do not understand the content of the bill, except that they are fanatically supporting entrenched partisan positions

In the course of deliberations and rapturous exchanges,  the First Deputy Speaker, Bernard Ahiafor, my Law Class 2002 mate, did not have it easy ensuring order and had to repeatedly call for retractions, which were subsequently ignored depending on who spoke after who, based on those recognised or called upon to speak.

In the end, the sterile process of approving or condemning positions in 2024 and 2026 prevailed.

Contributors never failed to make reference to what happened then and now before settling on their opinions.

For instance, when Rev. Ntim Fordjour, one of the key sponsors of the bill, rose to complain about smuggled clauses, the Majority took comfort from the technical perspective that he complained long before they got to the provisions he spoke about and thus saw him as ignorant.

However, when they eventually got there, he was reminded that he was part of the sponsors who introduced the clause, "in consonance with provisions of the 1992 Constitution," and the new provisions had been introduced to address their concerns against any future legal challenge.

But if one may ask, in all the pieces of criminal legislation, which one contains specific provisions of exemptions to protect public officials, lawyers and medical professionals, from being criminalised for providing basic human rights services to deviants.
 

Provision

If we did not need such provisions in the Criminal Code in consonance with the Constitution, why do we need them in the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill?

Do we accuse lawyers and medical personnel who provide services to those accused of armed robbery or murder as accomplices because of lack of express provisions to the contrary?

Before the contents and essence of the revised bill could be explained to the ordinary Ghanaian, far away in the United Kingdom, when our President, my Roommate, President John Dramani Mahama, commented on the bill, he pointed out that the bill has a long way to travel before it could become law and added significantly that the number of MPs in the House at the time of the purported passage of the bill could not constitute a quorum, which means that less than half of Members of Parliament were present. An indefensible and damaging indictment.

Article 104 (1) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana states that, "Except as otherwise provided in this Constitution, matters in Parliament shall be determined by the votes of  the majority of members present and voting, with at least half of all Members of Parliament present.”

This means that at least there should be 138 MPs in the chamber before any decision could be taken, with some processes requiring more than that number.

Thus, if the President was properly briefed before his comments, and whatever information he had would have come from Parliamentary sources, then we have a problem and do not need a citizen to bring this up at the Supreme Court for the Legislature to be ordered to do what is needful, lawful and legitimate.

Bombshell

But the worst was yet to come with the bombshell from the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumani Kingsford Bagbin, my year mate at Legon, that he was surprised about the hasty passage of the bill, stating that when he asked Ahiafor to step in, he knew that they had not reached the point of passing the bill into law.

As our elders insist, "se denkyem firi nsuo ase beka se bomokyikyie awu a, yennye no akyinye" meaning if the crocodile comes from under the water to say that a fish is dead, we do not dispute him.

Thus, oil was brought to fire, with the rebuttal from the Majority in Parliament that once the bill has been passed, it must be sent to the President for his assent.

Indeed, Sam Nartey George, who was all over calling for the bill to be passed in 2024, including organising demonstrations against former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo, insists that whatever the shape of the bill, it must be presented to the President for assent and that if the President has better reasons as to why the bill cannot be assented to now, he should return it to Parliament with his observations, maintaining that that was his position in 2024.

If the Majority knew that members present were less than 138 and, more importantly, that the House had not come to the point of passing the law, then why are they relying on the technicality that once the House passes a bill, all that is needed is presidential assent?

Why are they unwilling to accept the plea of the Speaker of Parliament to reconsider the bill with a broader appeal, reflecting a common position of Ghanaians?

Their reluctance to listen to the appeal from the Speaker could mean that they passed the bill with indecent haste because they have an agenda different from that of Ghanaians and that what they want to punish is of no significance than what they want to promote.

As someone has said of statistics, like bikinis, what they conceal is more significant than what they reveal. 

No wonder the leadership of our religious bodies are asking for copies of the bill as passed by Parliament to enable them to form enlightened opinions about it and also observe whether the law was informed by goodwill or otherwise and be able to contextualise it in the face of Proverbs 19:2  as reflected in the Good News Bible which says "Enthusiasm without knowledge is not good and whoever makes haste with his feet misses his way"  and "Desire without knowledge is not good; impatience will  get you into trouble."

English Standard Version.