Ghana’s Supreme Court has dismissed legal challenges against a proposed anti-LGBTQ+ law, clearing the way for President Nana Akufo-Addo to potentially enact one of Africa’s most restrictive legislations on LGBTQ+ rights. Despite concerns about human rights and warnings of significant financial risks, the bill has moved closer to becoming law.
The legislation, unanimously passed by parliament in February, further criminalises LGBTQ+ activities and advocacy. It proposes prison terms of up to five years for individuals who promote, sponsor, or support LGBTQ+ causes, in addition to the existing three-year sentence for same-sex relations.
President Akufo-Addo delayed signing the bill, awaiting the outcome of challenges brought before the Supreme Court by lawyers Amanda Odoi and Richard Sky. The seven-member panel, led by Justice Avril Lovelace-Johnson, ruled that the cases were premature, as the bill had not yet received presidential assent.
“Until there’s presidential assent, there is no act,” Justice Lovelace-Johnson stated during the televised proceedings, noting that the challenges were unanimously dismissed.
Lawyers representing Odoi and Sky expressed disappointment with the decision, indicating they would consider further actions after reviewing the full judgment.
The bill was introduced by a coalition of Christian, Muslim, and traditional Ghanaian leaders and has widespread support among conservative groups. However, critics argue it endangers human rights and could jeopardise international financial aid. Ghana’s finance ministry previously cautioned that the law might threaten $3.8 billion in World Bank support and a $3 billion loan package from the International Monetary Fund critical to addressing the nation’s economic crisis.
Human rights advocates have expressed alarm. Abena Takyiwaa Manuh, a senior fellow at Accra’s Centre for Democratic Governance, condemned the ruling, saying it places LGBTQ+ individuals and their allies at greater risk. “This formalism endangers the lives and health of LGBTQ+ people and human rights defenders. They can now do their worst,” she stated outside the court.
The decision has reignited debates over the balance between Ghana’s socio-cultural values and its international commitments to human rights and economic stability.
