The clash between Ketu North MP Eric Edem Agbana and Weija-Gbawe MP Jerry Ahmed Shaib revolves around the fate of the anti-LGBTQ+ bill and President Mahama’s stance on it. Shaib initiated the dispute, accusing Mahama of duplicity and demanding immediate assent to the bill. He questioned Mahama’s commitment to enacting the legislation, particularly in light of the president’s campaign promises. Agbana, however, countered Shaib’s assertions, arguing that the bill had effectively expired with the dissolution of the previous Parliament, rendering Shaib’s demands moot. He emphasized Mahama’s stated intention to sponsor and reintroduce the bill in the new Parliament as evidence of his commitment.
Agbana criticized Shaib’s understanding of parliamentary procedure, suggesting a lack of basic knowledge regarding the expiration of bills upon Parliament’s dissolution. He pointedly reminded Shaib that the previous president, Akufo-Addo, had refrained from assenting to the bill and that Shaib’s own party had subsequently pursued legal action. This, according to Agbana, demonstrated the complexity of the issue and the previous government’s own inaction. He implied that Shaib’s criticisms were misplaced and lacked a proper understanding of the legislative process.
Shaib, in response, countered Agbana’s claims regarding the bill’s expiration. He argued that the Constitution provides for the continuity of governance, encompassing bills awaiting presidential assent. Citing Article 113(1) of the Constitution and Orders 174 to 175 of Parliament’s Standing Orders, Shaib maintained that the bill’s status remained active and awaiting presidential action. He challenged Agbana’s assertion that the bill had become null and void, emphasizing the constitutional provisions that supported his position.
Shaib further questioned the integrity and consistency of Mahama’s leadership. He posed a rhetorical question: should Mahama’s actions be justified simply because the previous president, Akufo-Addo, also failed to assent to the bill? Shaib argued that true leadership demands adherence to promises and consistent action, irrespective of previous administrations’ failures. He implied that Mahama’s potential inaction would reflect a lack of commitment to his stated position and a failure of leadership.
The controversy surrounding the anti-LGBTQ+ bill, formally titled “Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill,” has been a significant point of contention within Ghana’s political landscape. The proposed legislation aims to criminalize LGBTQ+ related activities and advocacy, drawing both domestic and international criticism for its discriminatory nature. Though passed by the previous Parliament, it stalled due to the lack of presidential assent, placing it in a legislative limbo.
Mahama’s campaign pledge to address the bill has intensified public scrutiny. The exchange between Agbana and Shaib underscores the complex political and legislative hurdles surrounding the bill. It highlights the differing interpretations of parliamentary procedure and the weight of campaign promises in shaping the future of the legislation. The debate ultimately reflects the broader societal divisions on LGBTQ+ rights and the challenges faced by political leaders in navigating these sensitive issues. The ongoing debate is likely to continue as the new Parliament grapples with the reintroduction and potential passage of the contentious bill.
