NDC MPs support the Supreme Court’s decision regarding the anti-LGBTQ legislative petition.
The Supreme Court’s ruling to reject a petition against the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill has been praised by National Democratic Congress (NDC) MPs.
The decision comes after a seven-member Supreme Court panel, presided over by Justice Lovelace Avril Johnson, unanimously denied a petition submitted by television journalist and attorney Richard Dela Sky.
The anti-LGBTQ bill’s constitutionality has been contested in the petition. However, the Court decided that the bill’s constitutionality could not be challenged because it has not yet been signed into law.
Following the result, Francis-Xavier Sosu, the NDC MP for Madina, told JoyNews’ Parliamentary correspondent Kweku Asante that the Supreme Court had finally reached the correct conclusion.
Mr. Sosu claims that the supreme court maintained the fundamentals of the law, confirming that Parliament is the legislative branch of government and that the president’s approval completes its work.
With all due respect to Mr. Sky and his attorneys, he stated, “I think the action filed by Richard Sky was quite premature and I believe what the Supreme Court did today was simply upholding the rule of law and the separation of powers, which, until recently, the Supreme Court had not consistently done.”
Mr. Sosu pointed out that the Supreme Court has seemed to meddle in parliamentary business lately.
He did, however, characterise the Court’s decision to dismiss the case against the anti-LGBTQ measure as a break from that pattern.
It is obvious that the Supreme Court has distinguished itself today or perhaps given its interference with parliamentary business a second look. He clarified that the Court has now decided that Parliament’s work does not conclude until the President makes a decision on his or her assent.
President Akufo-Addo now has the duty to either sign the bill into law or give an explanation for his refusal to do so, according to the Madina lawmaker.
The President must explain his reasons in a memo to Parliament, which can then determine whether to change the law’s provisions or take other necessary measures, according to the Constitution, he continued, if the President declines to assent to the bill.
“The President can now choose whether or not to assent, but in any case, the law allows the President to inform Parliament of the reasons he does not want to assent, the parts of the law that he finds problematic, and the recommendations he has for the legislature,” Mr. Sosu stated.
He added that there might not be enough time for the current 8th Parliament to consider the law.
“However, we let the President make the final decision regarding this bill,” he stated.
Mr. Sosu went on to say that the law can be revived in the ninth parliament if it expires with the eighth.
There will be other bills that suffer the same fate if this one is killed by the 8th Parliament. I’ve started or introduced roughly 20 private bills. Only one has been ratified by the president, but three have been made laws. For instance, although the measure to eliminate the death sentence in the Ghanaian military has been approved, the president has not yet signed it.
Although it has been enacted, the anti-witchcraft measure has not been ratified by the president. These bills will expire with this Parliament if they are not signed. As members of the House who have been re-elected, it is our duty to prioritise important laws that have not yet been approved and reintroduce them, either by government action or private initiative,” Mr. Sosu continued.
