The Supreme Court has fixed July 17, 2024, to deliver its rulings on two applications filed by Broadcast Journalist, Richard Dela Sky, and Researcher, Dr Amanda Odoi seeking to injunct Parliament from transmitting the Anti-LGBTQ+Bill to the President for its assent.
This was after, the panel of five presided over by Chief Justice Gertrude Sacked Torkornoo, the Chief Justice heard arguments from all parties.
In a televised Court Proceedings, a lawyer for Dr Amanda Odoi, led by Ernest Arko while relying on processes filed said, both the Speaker and the Clerk to Parliament should be restrained by the Apex Court until after the determination of the substantive matter.
“We have before you this morning (Wednesday, July 3) an application for Interlocutory Injunction restraining the first Respondent (Speaker of Parliament) and the Clerk of Parliament from forwarding the bill passed on Feb 28, 2024, to the president for his assent,” Counsel for the Plaintiff submitted.
He contended that irreparable damage and harm would be visited heavily on the applicant if the Interlocutory Injunction is not granted since the Speaker has nothing to suffer if refused.
Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, said though he is not stating his position on the matter, “what the (Supreme) Court ought to look at in granting an application for interlocutory injunction is whether substantial questions of law have been raised by the Plaintiff.
Counsel for the Speaker, Thaddeus Sory, opposed to the Application on grounds that no violation would be occasioned on the Applicant if the request is refused.
He said the application is a repetition of what’s had earlier been put before the Court earlier by the Applicant, which was later struck out.
Constitutional Provisions
The parties all made references to Article 108(a)(i)(ii)(iii) and made their argument for and against.
Per Articles 108(a) states as follows; Parliament shall not, unless the bill is introduced or the motion is introduced by, or on behalf of, the President (a) proceed upon a bill including an amendment to a bill, that, in the opinion of the person presiding, makes provision for any of the following –
(I) The imposition of taxation or the alteration of taxation otherwise than by reduction;
(ii) Or the imposition of a charge on the Consolidated Fund or other public funds of Ghana or the alteration of any such charge otherwise than by reduction, or
(ii) The payment, issue or withdrawal from the Consolidated Fund or other public funds of Ghana of any money not charged on the Consolidated Fund or any increase in the amount of that payment, issue, or withdrawal;
Richard Sky case
In a similar but separate case, a lawyer for Richard Dela Sky, Paa Kwesi Abaidoo pointed to an absence of physical impact analysis which formed the basis for the passage of the Bill.
But, though Counsel for Parliament, Thaddeus Sory sought leave to be allowed to file it as a supplementary affidavit, the Court said, it could only be useful in the substantive matter and not the application for interlocutory injunctions.
The Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah Dame argued that the Bill ought to be stayed until the final determination of the substantive suit.
The panel of five chaired by the Chief Justice, Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, with Justice Mariama Owusu, Justice Prof. Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Justice Ernest Gaewu and Justice Yaw Darko Asare will determine whether to grant the request or not.
EIB Network’s Legal Affairs Correspondent, Murtala Inusah, reports that though the cases look similar, the Court will deliver two separate rulings on July 17.
Reliefs sought
Among the reliefs sought in Richard Sky’s writ is an order restraining the Speaker of Parliament and the Clerk to Parliament from presenting The Human and Sexual Values Bill, 2024 to the President of the Republic for his assent.
The Plaintiff is also asking the Court for an order restraining the President of the Republic from assenting to The Human and Sexual Values Bill, 2024, as such action will directly contravene the Constitutional safeguards of the liberties and rights of Ghanaians.
“An injunction barring any attempts to enforce the provisions of The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bil 2024, particularly those criminalizing same-sex relationships and related advocacy efforts,” he asked.