The Supreme Court dismisses suits against the Anti-LGBTQI Bill, ruling they were premature as the bill has not yet become law.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Anti-LGBTQI Bill has not yet become law; therefore, the suits filed against it were premature.
The court further clarified that there was no basis upon which to exercise its judicial review jurisdiction, as the bill has not yet received presidential assent.
Delivering its decision on Wednesday, December 18, the court dismissed two cases filed separately by media personality Richard Dela Sky and Dr. Amanda Odoi against the Anti-LGBTQI Bill.
According to the court, until the president assents to the bill, there is no actionable legislation that could warrant the use of its supervisory jurisdiction.
The court, chaired by Justice Avril Lovelace-Johnson, unanimously dismissed both suits and announced that its full reasoning for the decision would be made available on Friday, December 20.
TV3’s Laud Adu-Asare, who was present in court, reported the proceedings.
Details of the Cases
In Richard Sky’s case, he challenged the legality of the bill, arguing that it violates several provisions of the 1992 Constitution, including Articles 33(5), 12(1) and (2), 15(1), 17(1) and (2), 18(2), and 21(1)(a)(b)(d) and (e).
Sky sought eight reliefs, one of which contended that the Speaker of Parliament breached Article 108(a)(ii) by allowing the passage of a bill that imposes a charge on the Consolidated Fund or other public funds of Ghana.
Regarding Dr. Amanda Odoi’s case, the court noted that her writ failed to properly invoke its jurisdiction. Dr. Odoi had raised objections to specific provisions within the bill and sought a restraining order to prevent the Speaker of Parliament, the Attorney-General, and the Clerk of Parliament from forwarding the bill to President Akufo-Addo for assent.
Both lawsuits aimed to prevent the implementation of the controversial bill, citing constitutional violations and potential overreach.