The Supreme Court of Ghana has delivered a significant ruling on the ongoing legal challenge against the proposed anti-gay bill, effectively postponing any judicial review until the bill becomes law. The court, presided over by Justice Lovelace Johnson, dismissed the petitions filed by Richard Dela Sky and Dr. Amanda Odoi, arguing that a bill cannot be subject to constitutional scrutiny before receiving presidential assent and becoming legally enforceable. This decision has left the petitioners and their legal representatives in a state of uncertainty, as they await the full written ruling expected on Friday, December 20, 2024, to determine their next course of action. The court’s decision highlights the procedural intricacies of challenging legislation in Ghana, emphasizing that judicial review can only be applied to enacted laws, not bills under consideration.
Paa Kwesi Abaidoo, lead counsel for Richard Dela Sky, expressed his disappointment with the ruling while acknowledging the court’s authority. He emphasized that their legal team’s strategy hinges on the comprehensive ruling, particularly concerning their application for an interlocutory injunction. The injunction sought to halt the legislative process surrounding the bill, a request that the court decided to address concurrently with the main petition. Abaidoo explained that without access to the full ruling, which includes the court’s rationale and detailed explanation of its decision, they cannot formulate a concrete plan of action. He reiterated the importance of respecting the court’s timeline and waiting for the complete ruling before making any further pronouncements.
The legal challenge mounted by Dela Sky and Dr. Odoi represents a preemptive attempt to prevent the potential enactment of what they consider an unconstitutional law. Their argument rests on the premise that the bill, in its current form, infringes upon fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Ghanaian constitution. By seeking judicial intervention before the bill becomes law, they aimed to prevent the potential harm and discrimination that they believe the law would inflict on the LGBTQI+ community in Ghana. However, the court’s decision underscores the established legal principle that judicial review applies to existing laws, not prospective ones.
The Supreme Court’s decision creates a procedural hurdle for those opposing the bill, requiring them to wait for its enactment before challenging its constitutionality. This delay introduces a period of uncertainty for the LGBTQI+ community and their allies, who now face the possibility of the bill becoming law before its legal validity can be tested. This situation raises significant concerns regarding potential human rights violations during the interim period, should the bill be passed and enforced before any judicial review can occur. The delay also highlights the challenges faced by individuals and groups seeking to challenge legislation on human rights grounds, particularly when facing potential prejudice and discrimination.
The anticipated full ruling on Friday is expected to provide a detailed explanation of the court’s reasoning and provide a clearer picture of the legal landscape surrounding the anti-gay bill. This detailed explanation will be crucial for the petitioners and their legal team to determine their next steps, which may include appealing the decision or preparing for a constitutional challenge once the bill becomes law. The ruling will also provide valuable insight into the court’s interpretation of the constitutionality of legislation affecting marginalized communities and the balance between legislative power and judicial review in Ghana.
The case has drawn considerable national and international attention, highlighting the ongoing debate surrounding LGBTQI+ rights in Ghana and the broader African context. The outcome of this legal battle will have far-reaching implications for the LGBTQI+ community in Ghana and could set a precedent for other countries grappling with similar legislative challenges. The full ruling will be closely scrutinized by human rights organizations, legal scholars, and international observers, as it will offer a critical understanding of the Ghanaian legal system’s approach to fundamental human rights and the protection of marginalized groups. The decision will also play a significant role in shaping the ongoing dialogue on LGBTQI+ rights in Ghana and beyond.
