All cases challenging Anti-LGBT+ Bill at Supreme Court are premature – Lawyer

Lawyer and author, Tachie Antiedu, has described as premature the cases pending before the Supreme Court over the passage of the Anti-LGBT+ Bill.

The lawyer averred that one can only invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over a law when it has received presidential assent.

He argued that the processes involved in ensuring that the Anti-LGBT+ Bill is made law have not ended, hence those who have gone to the Supreme Court rushed.

He went on to say that, due to the reasons given by the president for refusing to assent to the bill, i.e., the pending cases before the Supreme Court, the Constitution has made it clear under Articles 2 and 130 that the Supreme Court has the authority to determine whether the parliament went beyond its powers in passing a law should any aggrieved person invoke their original jurisdiction.

"That is the settled law of the judicial powers of the Supreme Court. Parliament also has a constitutional duty to pass a law. It did so in the case of the anti-gay bill.

"However, the law has no finality yet. Until the president assents, the bill cannot function. It would have to become law before you could challenge it. It would be premature to challenge it when it has not been enacted," he stressed.

The Office of the President has written to Parliament to refrain from transmitting the Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values, commonly referred to as the Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill, to President Akufo-Addo for his assent.