Contrary to the proposal of the Constitutional, Legal, and Parliamentary Affairs Committee proposal to delete Article 4 of the Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, former Minority Leader, Haruna Iddrisu has argued otherwise.

The article is intended to prohibit the promotion of any conduct that undermines Ghanaian norms and customs.

The Committee is however of the view that that will clamp free speech on the subject matter of LBTQ+ in a wholesome manner.

“Mr Speaker the clause we are looking at is at the heart of the bill. Now if the word ‘undermine’ is what is causing the difficulty, probably 4 (1) can read a person shall not promote improper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values specified in section 2 of this act. So the word ‘undermines’ will and probably can sit with thinking or contemplation on Article 39 of the Constitution.
“I do not think that 39 should necessarily create an offense. I do not believe that is the thinking of those who framed the Constitution. So maybe the word ‘undermine’ is giving us a challenge so we should delete it so article 2 becomes relevant.”
Haruna Iddrisu

Furthermore, the former Minority Leader urged 1 (a) to read “a person shall not engage in conduct…” to align with article 39.

Assin-North Court Ruling: The judge erred both in law and in fact – Haruna Idddrisu — *Haruna Iddrisu*

“(1) Subject to clause (2) of this article, the State shall take steps to encourage the integration of appropriate customary values into the fabric of national life through formal and informal education and the conscious introduction of cultural dimensions to relevant aspects of national planning.”
Article 30, 1992 Constitution

The focus shifted towards regulating of behavior to ensure adherence to established sexual rights and Ghanaian family values. This approach is intended to align with Article 39 and fulfill the committee’s expectations. Article 4 will play a crucial role in delineating acceptable conduct, removing ambiguity associated with terms like “undermine.” Engaging in behavioral patterns contrary to the country’s customs and norms may render individuals liable under the stipulations of the bill.

Constitutional, Legal, And Parliamentary Affairs Committee

The Chairperson of the committee, Hon. Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi, however, emphasized the need to delete the article entirely.

“Mr Speaker, it is not for nothing that you once referred to this bill before us as the most important bill. I call it the controversial bill. Mr Speaker, what we seek to delete, and let me through the entire clause with your permission.
“What is the meaning of undermine? Mr Speaker, we are making laws that will stand the test of time and we will have to go to court to prove. If anyone is found guilty of this law we have to go to court to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the person has undermined the proper human rights and Ghanaian family values.”
Hon. Kwame Anyimadu-Antwi

According to the Committee, achieving this goal poses significant challenges, and establishing proof is a complex, if not nearly impossible, task. Even media professionals, seeking public opinions, may inadvertently contribute to the dissemination of views that could be deemed culpable under the Ghanaian Family Values Bill.

This implies that the act of promoting is subject to criminalization. It is important to note that careful consideration was given to the language used while presenting arguments related to Article 39.

Instead, the observation was that Article 39 of the Constitution does not define an offense but rather establishes an obligation without an associated offense

Honorable Haruna suggested substituting the term “promotion” with “prohibition,” and since Article 12 already addressed prohibition, the question arises whether it is prudent to duplicate the offense of promotion in both Article 4 and Article 12.

Parliament resolved to have further discussions between the committee and the sponsors of the bill to resolve the issues.