If President Akufo-Addo decides not to sign the Ghanaian Family Values and Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights Bill—also known as the anti-LGBTQ+ Bill—Parliament will override his veto, according to the Minority Leader.
Dr. Ato Forson emphasized that President Akufo-Addo’s unlawful acts will not prevent Parliament from carrying out its responsibilities.
Three bills that were passed by the House last year but were categorized as private members bills because they imposed charges on the Consolidated Fund have prevented President Akufo-Addo from signing them.
The anti-LGBTQ+ bill, which falls under the category of private members bill, has provisions that levies fees on the consolidated fund.
Dr. Ato Forson explained during a Wednesday, February 7 media briefing that Parliament can override the President’s decision with a two-thirds majority vote if the President chooses not to sign the bill into law.
There are rumors that the president did not sign the bill into law after it was passed. But the constitution foresaw this and stated that the house would have to follow a specific procedure, which is the approval of the two-thirds majority of members.
He declared, “Let’s clear the first obstacle and pass it. Then, send it to the President. If he doesn’t assent, we’ll make a decision.”
Majority Leader Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu did, however, also say during the briefing that Parliament will continue to talk about the constitutional issues brought up by the bill.
A change to the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill has been approved by Parliament, and it could result in a custodial sentence of up to six months for those who assist, facilitate, encourage, or promote LGBTQ activities.
Sam George, a co-sponsor of the bill, put forth the amendment because he thinks that, once the law is passed, severe penalties are required to guarantee that it is followed.
The revised bill stipulates that individuals found guilty of encouraging LGBTQ activities could receive a minimum sentence of three months and a maximum sentence of six months, or a fine ranging from GH₵600 to GH₵1200.
Sam George stated in Parliament that he thought the GH¢600 was a good deal because it would help avoid long jail terms. Judges, however, are still able to choose to punish with fines, jail time, or both. GH₵600 to GH₵1200, or a minimum of three months and a maximum of six months, therefore, seems to me to be a sufficient deterrent.
Alexander Afenyo-Markin, the Deputy Majority Leader, is against the amendment and favors a maximum three-month jail sentence.
In addition to the costs to the state, he contended, studies have shown that incarceration actually makes people worse off when they are released.
Mr. Afenyo-Markin said, “We should rather look at one month and three months instead of three months and six months,” while speaking to Parliament as well. Absolutely, we shouldn’t go higher if the proposal’s two- and four-month penalty units cannot be defined in a comparable manner.
He continued, “The court has a stance on sentencing.” That’s the rationale behind the plea deal that we recently introduced. We have also addressed some of these issues with the legal plea agreement that we passed.”
He stated that a fine is an option in even serious criminal cases if the offender is willing to pay to handle the trial’s duration and other costs, as well as to reduce the number of people incarcerated.
