President John Dramani Mahama has committed to signing the controversial Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill if Parliament completes the legislative process and transmits it to his office, declaring Tuesday that his views align completely with the Christian Council of Ghana on matters concerning gender identity and family structure. The announcement during a courtesy call at the Jubilee House marks the President’s strongest public backing yet for legislation that human rights organizations describe as among the most severe restrictions on rights globally.
Mahama explained that the bill before the previous administration was never submitted to the President for assent because of a legal injunction that stopped the Speaker of Parliament from transmitting it. By constitutional convention, any bill not assented to before a parliamentary term expires automatically lapses, meaning the legislation must be reintroduced in the current Parliament for fresh debate and voting.
The President stated firmly that his position remains unchanged on fundamental questions. He declared that gender is determined at birth and that the family constitutes the foundation of national stability, emphasizing these principles have shaped Ghanaian society for generations. Mahama told Christian Council leaders gathered at the presidency that there exist no questions or equivocations about what he believes regarding family structure and social values.
He endorsed Speaker of Parliament Alban Bagbin’s call for the bill to be relaunched and debated afresh to ensure clarity, consensus, and proper legislative grounding. Mahama said that if the people’s representatives in Parliament endorse the bill, vote on it, and pass it, and it comes to him as president, he will sign it. The President stressed that the constitutional process must prevail and the final outcome will reflect the will of the Ghanaian people.
The bill originally received unanimous approval from Ghana’s 8th Parliament on 28 February 2024 after introduction as a private members’ motion in 2021. Among the provisions are up to three years imprisonment for engaging in same sex intercourse and six to ten years imprisonment for individuals or organizations advocating for rights of persons identifying under various orientations. The bill criminalizes failure to report persons to authorities and requires reporting anyone who uses social media platforms to produce, publish, or disseminate content promoting activities prohibited by the bill.
Former President Nana Akufo Addo declined to sign the legislation after legal challenges questioned its constitutionality. Two separate lawsuits filed with Ghana’s Supreme Court argued the bill violated fundamental rights protections. In December 2024, Ghana’s Supreme Court dismissed the constitutional challenge, clearing the way for potential enactment should the legislation successfully navigate the parliamentary process again.
During a December 2024 interview with the BBC, Mahama stated that a future government would sign the bill depending on its contents and specifics, noting that although activities do not align with the country’s culture, values, and religious beliefs, there must be thorough scrutiny of what the bill proposes. He characterized it not as targeting specific communities but as a Family Values Bill addressing broader social concerns.
Mahama revealed on 28 February 2025 while fellowshipping with clergy at the Accra International Conference Centre that he had spoken with the Speaker so that renewal of the expired bill would be introduced as a government sponsored bill rather than as a private members’ motion. The President said he hopes consultations will result in reintroduction with stronger governmental backing, believing his leadership should reflect values of the people he governs.
The legislation has drawn intense international criticism from human rights organizations and foreign governments. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said the bill broadens the scope of criminal sanctions against individuals simply for being who they are and threatens criminal penalties against perceived allies. He called for the bill not to become law and urged Ghana to ensure everyone can live free from violence, stigma, and discrimination regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Human Rights Watch stated the bill is inconsistent with Ghana’s long standing tradition of peace, tolerance, and hospitality and flies in the face of the country’s international human rights commitments. The organization noted that laws criminalizing same sex conduct violate rights to privacy and freedom from discrimination under treaties Ghana has ratified including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Ghana’s Ministry of Finance issued a warning in March 2024 forecasting that if the bill becomes law, Ghana will likely lose 3.8 billion dollars in World Bank funding alone over the next five to six years. The ministry told President Akufo Addo that endorsing the bill would impact the country’s overall development at a time when Ghana is implementing an International Monetary Fund (IMF) economic recovery program following significant fiscal challenges.
Amnesty International documented more than 70 human rights attacks against individuals from January to September 2023 following the bill’s introduction in Parliament. The organization warned that passage would exacerbate fear and hatred, could incite violence against fellow citizens, and would negatively impact free speech, freedom of movement, and freedom of association. Local human rights organization Rightify Ghana called the legislation an attack on fundamental human rights that would steal freedoms of speech, expression, privacy, association, and assembly.
Gay sexual acts remain criminalized under Section 104 of Ghana’s Criminal Code, inherited from the colonial era Offences Against the Person Act of 1861. The section criminalizes what it terms unnatural carnal knowledge with penalties of three years imprisonment, though authorities have never prosecuted anyone under the provision despite discrimination against individuals being common across the country. In July 2024, Ghana’s Supreme Court dismissed a constitutional challenge against Section 104, with legal arguments couched in claims around the country’s unique traditional and cultural identity and rejection of alien cultural values.
Faith based groups, traditional leaders, and civil society organizations remain sharply engaged on the legislation’s contours and potential social implications. The bill received sponsorship from a coalition comprising Christian, Muslim, and traditional Ghanaian leaders, finding substantial backing among parliamentarians who described it as defending African family values against Western cultural influences. Religious support spans denominations, though some religious figures including Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana have expressed concerns about criminalization.
The constitutional challenge previously argued the bill violates Ghana’s Constitution protecting rights to dignity, equality, nondiscrimination, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and academic freedom. A coalition of 18 civil society groups known as the Big 18 opposed the bill from introduction, warning it would force families to disown members, close organizations providing services, restrict academic discussion, and create environments of fear where individuals face mob violence and arbitrary detention.
Parliament’s Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee reviewed the original bill and recommended passage, citing substantial popular support from Ghanaians. The committee’s report failed to acknowledge documented submissions from experts including the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice stating that dignity, equality, and nondiscrimination should apply to everyone regardless of orientation or identity.
The bill classifies intersex persons as people born with biological abnormalities and bans administration of healthcare related to gender identity. It forces all associations in the community to disband under threat of six to ten year imprisonment for anyone participating in such organizations. The legislation imposes duties on citizens and institutions to promote and protect what it terms proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values, implying duties on parents, landlords, business owners, and religious institutions while encouraging public reporting of community members.
Political leaders tapped into sentiment during the December 2024 general election campaign. Mahama, who won 56 percent of presidential votes, characterized the legislation during campaign periods as defending family values rather than targeting specific communities. His opponent Mahamudu Bawumia stated he would sign the bill if it reached his desk as president, provided the Supreme Court ruled it consistent with constitutional provisions.
Regional trends show similar legislation advancing across multiple African nations. Uganda passed an Anti Homosexuality Act in March 2023 that local organizations documented resulted in increased verbal and physical attacks, mob violence, arrests of activists, loss of employment, closure of organizations, clampdowns on services including healthcare, families disowning members, and assaults on students. Ghana’s bill follows patterns observed elsewhere on the continent where authorities have expanded criminal charges against individuals and allies.
The meeting between President Mahama and the Christian Council comes at a time when national debate on family values, morality, and gender issues continues intensifying. The President stressed his administration remains committed to upholding principles that have shaped Ghanaian society, declaring complete alignment with the Christian Council’s position on family structure and social values. Faith communities welcomed his statements, viewing them as affirmation of religious teachings on marriage and gender.
Legal experts note that if Parliament reintroduces the bill as government sponsored legislation rather than a private members’ motion, it could have stronger procedural standing and broader institutional support during the legislative process. Government sponsored bills typically receive more comprehensive review and departmental input compared to private members’ motions, though both must pass through the same constitutional procedures including committee review, multiple readings, and parliamentary voting.
The Commonwealth Lawyers Association expressed grave concern regarding the bill, urging the President not to ratify legislation they believe violates Commonwealth Charter principles opposing all forms of discrimination. The association noted provisions endanger lawyers representing clients charged under its terms, who may be seen as aiding or abetting individuals and face criminal penalties themselves. Article 108 of Ghana’s Constitution prevents private members’ bills from imposing financial burdens on public funds, raising additional procedural questions about the legislation’s path forward.
International pressure has intensified as development partners, diplomatic missions, and multilateral institutions monitor the situation. Western governments have indicated potential reconsideration of bilateral aid and cooperation agreements should the bill become law, citing concerns about human rights commitments and treaty obligations. African Union resolutions on protection against violence based on real or imputed sexual orientation or gender identity place additional pressure on Ghana to uphold continental human rights standards.
Supporters argue the legislation protects children, preserves cultural identity, and reflects deeply held religious convictions across Christianity, Islam, and traditional belief systems practiced by the majority of Ghana’s 33 million people. They contend that Western nations imposing their values through funding conditionality represents neo colonialism undermining African sovereignty on social and moral questions. Religious leaders backing the bill emphasize scriptural teachings defining marriage and gender roles while rejecting what they characterize as foreign ideologies incompatible with African traditions.
The bill’s future depends on parliamentary action during the current legislative session. If reintroduced and passed, it would require presidential assent within seven days of transmission. The President has the constitutional authority either to sign it into law, refer it back to Parliament with objections, or submit it to the Council of State for advisory opinion. Mahama’s Tuesday declaration suggests he would choose assent if Parliament completes the legislative process according to constitutional requirements.
Source: newsghana.com.gh
