A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice Lovelace Avril Johnson, has unanimously dismissed a petition filed by media practioner and lawyer Richard Dela Sky.

The petition challenged the constitutionality of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, widely known as the anti-gay bill. 

The apex court ruled that the legislative process surrounding the bill adhered to constitutional requirements.

Richard Dela Sky had sought a declaration from the court that the bill, which has sparked vigorous national debate, was null and void. However, the justices rejected his claims, affirming that the legislative process for the proposed anti-LGBTQI legislation complied with the law.

The bill, which remains under parliamentary consideration, seeks to criminalise activities related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI) advocacy.

If enacted, it would impose penalties on individuals who promote or fund LGBTQI initiatives, as well as those offering indirect support.

While proponents claim it is essential to safeguarding Ghanaian cultural and family values, critics denounce it as a violation of fundamental human rights, including freedoms of expression and association.

A separate legal challenge was also filed by Amanda Odoi, an advocate for equality and inclusion.

The plaintiffs argued that Parliament failed to meet the constitutional quorum requirements stipulated in Articles 102 and 104 during the legislative proceedings for the bill.

They contended that this procedural failure rendered the process unconstitutional and the bill’s passage invalid.

In dismissing the petitions, the Supreme Court emphasised that the bill had not yet been enacted into law. Justice Lovelace Johnson clarified that until a bill receives presidential assent, it remains a legislative proposal and does not qualify as an enforceable law subject to judicial review.

This procedural distinction formed the basis of the court’s unanimous decision.