Re: anti-gay rights Bill, again, dear Honourables, ‘where is the compassion?’

On October 28, 2025, Speaker of Parliament, Honourable Alban Bagbin, informed the members that the LGBTQ+ Bill was back in the House because it lapsed in the Eighth Parliament, as President Nana Akufo-Addo did not sign it into law before leaving office.

An overview: “On February 25, 2025, the controversial anti-LGBTQ+ bill was reintroduced in the Ghanaian Parliament by a group of ten MPs.”

The Bill now before the Ninth, “prescribes a three-year jail term for people who identify as gay and five to 10 years for promoters and advocates” (BBC, March 3, 2025).

In my opinion, the reintroduction presents Parliament with a great opening to review the controversial draft law, which has such draconian stipulations. Why should people of a different sexual orientation be regarded as even worse than murderers, judging by the extreme punishments proposed in the Bill, also known as the ‘anti-gay rights bill’?

Most concerning of all, if it becomes law, its ‘dragnet’ effect means that even journalists who write about, or in support of, the rights of gays, would be deemed to have committed an offence, and could be jailed! Thus, evidently, it’s a Bill that should concern everybody, not gays alone.

Fortunately, as widely reported in January, to his credit, President John Mahama himself appears to have a more accommodating position on the matter:

“During a meeting with the Catholic Bishops, President Mahama explained that the bill’s failure provides an opportunity for a more inclusive conversation on the matter.

“I believe we should have a conversation about it again so that, if we decide to move the bill forward, it is done with a broader consensus,” he stated.

“The President suggested that the bill should be reintroduced as a government-sponsored bill, rather than a private member’s bill, to ensure wider support and consultation with all relevant stakeholders.

“Additionally, President Mahama emphasised the importance of teaching family values through education, rather than relying on legislation alone.

“If we teach our values in schools, we won’t need a bill to enforce our family values. Instead of passing the family values bill, we should focus on agreeing on a curriculum that instills these values in our children as they grow up so that legislation isn’t necessary,” he explained (Myjoyonline, January 14, 2025).

Surely, this is a cue for the MPs to follow?

I have previously expressed my views on the subject in a number of articles and, to refresh memories, the following are excerpts from four of them:

IN 2021

1.Headline, Of the ‘low hanging fruit’ factor, ‘Thoughts of a Native Daughter’ column, The Mirror, October 11, 2021:

I’ve often wondered why in this country the persistent reports of all sorts of sexual and other assaults of children, and brutalities against the vulnerable, especially women, never seem to excite the sort of overwhelming outcry that even the merest hint of homosexual news attracts.

Is it because people with different sexual orientation represent the ‘low hanging fruit’, the easy prey?

In July, 2021, eight Members of Parliament submitted to the House a draft law which criminalises homosexual practices, and which seeks to imprison offenders identified as lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders, queers and others (LGBTQ +).

Seven of them are from the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC): Sam Nartey-George; Della Adjoa Sowah; Emmanuel Bedzrah; Alhassan Suhuyini; Rita Naa Odoley Sowah; Helen Adjoa Ntoso; Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor; and, from the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP), John Ntim Fordjour.

News of a memorandum to Parliament on September 29, by a group of (18) concerned citizens, calling for the outright rejection of what it describes as “this dangerous bill”, came as a huge relief.

The following are passages from the group’s 30-page memo, read by Lawyer Akoto Ampaw at their press conference in Accra, on October 4, 2021:

Introduction

The LGBTQ+ Bill currently before Parliament is a major step backwards for democracy, inclusiveness, the protection of minorities and the vulnerable in society, and of fundamental human rights in Ghana.

Violation of fundamental freedoms

The Bill violates virtually all the key fundamental freedoms guaranteed under (our national) Constitution, including:

1. the right to freedom of speech and expression;
2. the right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief;
3. the freedom of association and the right to organize;
4. the right to freedom from discrimination; and,
5. the right to human dignity.

Conclusion

When all the fanciful justifications, supposedly grounded in culture, tradition and religion, are stripped of their beguiling clothes and adornments, what is left of the high sounding “Bill for the Protection of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Family Values” is an Orwellian nightmare.

We urge that the Bill ought, with respect, to be firmly rejected by the Parliamentary Select Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, and by Parliament as a whole.

It has no place in our constitutional democratic republic, Mr. Akoto Ampaw stressed.

Members of the group:

1. Mr. Akoto Ampaw
2. Professor Emerita Takyiwaa Manuh
3. Professor Kwame Karikari
4. Professor Kofi Gyimah-Boadi
5. Professor Audrey Gadzekpo
6. Dr. Rose Mensah-Kutin
7. Dr. Yao Graham
8. Professor Dzodzi Tsikata
9. Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh
10. Mr. Kwasi Adu Amankwah
11. Dr. Kojo Asante
12. Mr. Kingsley Ofei-Nkansah
13. Mr. Akunu Dake
14. Mr. Tetteh Hormeku-Ajei
15. Professor Raymond Atuguba
16. 1Dr. Charles Wereko-Brobby
17. Dr. Joseph Asunka
18. Nana Ama Agyemang Asante.

As the group stated at the press conference, it’s not about whether lesbianism or gayism is right or wrong; it’s about “the blatant violation of human rights, as contained in the Bill.”

Even if one strongly disapproves of gays, to me that is no reason to criminalise them or their families and associates; or jail them.

Incidentally, I asked a very senior clergyman who was reported to have expressed support for the Bill a simple question: “I’m wondering what you would do if you found out that your relative is a homosexual. Should they be jailed for ten years?”

Since then, we have communicated many times but, significantly, my question remains unanswered.

My support for the memo is in the spirit of the Martin Luther King stance: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere … Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”

I congratulate the 18 on their brilliant memo, and for championing the cause of the vulnerable, the voiceless and the powerless,

2.The other side of the LGBTQ+ matter: where is the compassion? ‘Native Daughter’ column, December 11, 2021:

To me, there are a number of troubling issues about the continuing anti-gay rights controversy, starting with the word, ‘compassion’ – or rather the absence of it in the stance of the initiators of the draft law and its supporters.

Despite the fact that all religions preach love and humanitarianism, apparently none of the religious leaders campaigning so strenuously for the LGBTQ+ law, oppose its extremely ruthless proposed punishments.

Why? Is it only ‘straight’ or heterosexual people, who deserve compassion?

Unbelievably, some backers of the Bill have even gone to the extent of reportedly issuing death threats to Lawyer Akoto Ampaw, one of the group of 18 Concerned Citizens campaigning for total rejection of the Bill.

In fact, the “not less than five years and not more than ten years”, and similar cruel proposed punishment feature a number of times in the Bill.

And I thought that Parliament was supposed to be a refuge for those seeking justice!

“A significant part of the advocacy campaign,” Bill proponents argue, “is that it’s against inhumane treatment of perceived (gay) persons by homophobic persons.”

But if a law has been passed which stipulates such mean punishments, can those penalties, too, not be classified as “inhumane treatment” and “homophobic”?

Prisons worldwide are reportedly the hotbeds of homosexual activity. Thus, will sentenced offenders not be getting the freedom to continue that way of life in prison?

IN 2023

3.A never ending controversy and the need for a humane law for all, published online on April 4, 2023:

In the continuing heated controversy over the draconian anti-gay rights Bill, which now has an amended title as ‘Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2021’, one question on my mind is: why the excessive punishments?

Distressingly, even our religious leaders appear enthusiastic about the proposed stringent penalties! Where is their compassion?

Notably, the Pope recently reportedly signed a decree forbidding priests from blessing same sex marriages. However, significantly, Pope Francis didn’t say that gays should be imprisoned.

If indeed Ghana needs this law, hopefully, above all, it will be a just, fair and humane law for all.

4.Thank you, Cardinal Turkson, for the Christian compassion and leadership, published online on December 13, 2023:

An article dedicated to the esteemed memory of Lawyer Akoto Ampaw

It’s tragic that Lawyer Akoto Ampaw (who died on October 20, 2023), didn’t live to hear the emphatic affirmation, by no less a person than Cardinal Peter Appiah Turkson, of the right of homosexuals to live free from persecution; that there is no need to criminalise them.

In a BBC interview on November 27, 2023, Cardinal Turkson, an eminent Ghanaian Prelate and Cardinal of the Catholic Church, stated: “My position has simply been this, that LGBT, gay people, may not be criminalised because they’ve committed no crime…To criminalise anybody, (you have to be) able to identify the crime.”

However, he added, “neither should this position also become something to be imposed on cultures, which are not yet ready to accept (such a sexual inclination) …”

Moreover, Cardinal Turkson stated, “the Ghanaian culture has known of people with some such tendencies … There is an expression for them, which means that this phenomenon is known in the culture and in the community.”

So, thank you, Cardinal Turkson, for highlighting the need for humaneness.

Unfortunately, it appears that in Ghana the fear of same sex marriages happening in the country, has clouded the whole debate. Typically, when one defends LGBTQ rights, the response is “you must be one of them”.

But do I have to be a widow before I write in support of fair treatment for widows? Do I have to be physically challenged before I can write in support of disability friendly laws?

Homosexual, gay or lesbian lifeclass is certainly considered a taboo in the Ghanaian society, but is a taboo necessarily a crime?

The MPs who, reportedly, in private express reservations about the proposed excessive penalties, but have a different stance in public, should stand up now and be counted where it matters – in the House.

The fear of same-sex unions should not lead to the proposed extreme punishments. Taboo, yes; but not criminalised!

IN 2025

‘Rightify Ghana’ names the 10 sponsors of the reintroduced Bill, six from the minority New Patriotic Party (NPP) and four from the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) as:

1. Mr. Samuel Nartey George (NDC, MP for Ningo-Prampram)
2. Mr. Emmanuel Kwasi Bedzra (NDC, Ho West)
3. Mrs. Helen Adjoa Ntoso (NDC, Krachi West)
4. Ms. Rita Naa Odoley Sowah (NDC, Dadekotopon)
5. Mr. John Ntim Fordjour (NPP, MP for Assin South)
6. Mr. Nurideen Muhammed Mummuni (NPP, Nalerugu-Gambaga
7. Mr. Vincent Ekow Assafuah (NPP, Old Tafo)
8. Mr. Alhassan Tampuli Sulemana (NPP, Gushegu)
9. Dr Tiah Abdul Kabiru Mahama (NPP, Walewale)
10. Mr. Anthony Mmieh (NPP, Odotobri)

Honourables, and Bill advocates, please have a rethink about the cruel, inhumane proposed punishments! Anyway, what guarantee is there that imprisonment will cure homosexual tendencies?

Would any of you be happy to see your relative sentenced to jail simply because of their sexual orientation?

In what way would the proposed excessive, cruel and malicious punishments be helpful to Ghana’s development?

Significantly, at a recent engagement with the media in Accra, Speaker Bagbin reportedly “reaffirmed his commitment to nurturing a Parliament that is progressive, transparent, inclusive and responsive to the needs of citizens,” (Daily Guide, November 5, 2025).

A very encouraging assurance by the Speaker.

But, Mr. Speaker, respectfully, I suggest adding just one small word, ‘all’, to your assurance. Thus, the sentence would read “…nurturing a Parliament that is progressive, transparent, inclusive and responsive to the needs of ALL citizens” – including those of a different sexual orientation.

Undoubtedly, compassion should be the guiding light.

   Comments1