Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, has asserted that no entity, including the judiciary, should intervene in bills before they receive presidential assent.
Bagbin expressed frustration at receiving legal notices regarding matters still under parliamentary consideration, warning that such actions undermine the legislature’s authority.
” When it comes to lawmaking until all the processes in this house are exhausted, there is no business for anybody including a court to consider because the Constitution, as the enabling legislation, takes care of all these challenges. Until it is a law, it is assented to by the President judiciary has no jurisdiction to try to find into it.
“This is noteworthy, we have to take this seriously or else our legislative authority is being taken away from us by other agencies and arms of government, that should be resisted by this house, or else your being here is of no consequence.
“The law is very clear on this and so until a bill is assented to by the president nobody has any business to take that process that is being considered by the House to the court, I don’t want to preempt the judgment of the Supreme Court in this matter but I have given notice because on daily basis I am being served with writs as party on matters that are being considered by the House, that is why I am compelled to say this.”
His remarks coincide with the Supreme Court’s scheduled ruling on July 17, 2024, concerning Dr. Amanda Odoi’s application for an interlocutory injunction against Parliament’s transmission of the anti-gay bill to the presidency.
On the same day, the court will also consider an application from media personality and lawyer Richard Dela Sky.
This follows arguments presented by the plaintiffs’ lawyers, including Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame and Thaddeus Sory, counsel for the Speaker of Parliament.
Chief Justice Gertrude Torkornoo, leading a 5-member panel, highlighted that the court will issue separate rulings for each of the two cases during the closing remarks after today’s hearing.
The panel comprises Justice Mariama Owusu, Justice Prof. Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Justice Ernest Gaewu, and Justice Yaw Darko Asare.
Currently, the Supreme Court is addressing two lawsuits challenging Parliament’s passage of the anti-LGBTQ+ bill. Richard Dela Sky is specifically contesting the constitutionality of Parliament’s approval of the “Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill.”
He argues that the bill violates several provisions of the 1992 Constitution, including Article 33(5) and Articles 12(1) and (2), 15(1), 17(1) and (2), 18(2), and 21(1)(a)(b)(d) and (e).
Richard Dela Sky is pursuing eight reliefs, one of which seeks an order declaring that the Speaker of Parliament violated Article 108(a)(ii) of the Constitution by permitting the passage of the bill, which imposes charges on the Consolidated Fund or other public funds of Ghana.
Dr. Amanda Odoi has voiced objections to certain provisions within the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill.
She seeks a restraining order aimed at preventing the Speaker, the Attorney-General, and the Clerk of Parliament from forwarding the bill to President Akufo-Addo for approval.