hana’s new anti-homosexuality bill infringes a number of rights and freedoms, not solely of lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ+) individuals however of heterosexuals too. The invoice has been within the works since 2021 when it was tabled in parliament as a private member’s bill.
The goal of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Billis
to offer for human sexual rights and household values and for associated issues.
At the guts of the competition in regards to the proposed regulation is the query of discrimination, its goal and its impact of nullifying or impairing the popularity, enjoyment or train by all individuals, on an equal footing, of all rights and freedoms.
The title of the invoice, clearly, is ironic as a result of the regulation quite units out to disclaim the best to sexuality and associated rights to LGBTIQ+ individuals and to criminalise their actions. Moreover, what constitutes “sexual right” is just not outlined within the invoice. The key motion which is criminalised is consensual sexual relations between two gay adults.
The invoice defines such practices, linking them to related provisions within the Criminal and Other Offences Act of Ghana. Interestingly, it additionally criminalises different acts, resembling oral intercourse, which heterosexual {couples} additionally do. This will, subsequently, robotically “convert” heterosexuals into homosexuals. The LGBTIQ+ group can also be prohibited from marriage and from adopting or fostering.
If the invoice is handed, Ghana will be a part of 36 African countries the place homosexuality is unlawful. It’s punishable by dying in some countries , together with Nigeria and Mauritania. So, Africa stays a tricky place for LGBTIQ+ individuals. But there was some progress in nations like South Africa and Mauritius the place colonial period legal guidelines have been repealed.
As a scholar of worldwide human rights regulation, I consider this invoice will infringe the best to privateness, proper to well being, freedom of affiliation and expression, and press freedom. It may even impinge on the rights of academics, lecturers, civil society activists and residents who share content material on social media platforms that the invoice deems unlawful.
Compromising key freedoms
The invoice’s criminalisation of consensual sexual relations between two gay adults and imposition of sentence of three years on violators of that provision of the regulation is prohibitive and disproportionate. The observe shouldn’t be criminalised, but when in any respect, violation ought to at finest appeal to a non-custodial sentence, for instance a nice or group work. The LGBTIQ+ group has the best to be handled with dignity. The reality that somebody is homosexual shouldn’t result in a lack of his/her humanity.
Moreover, for the reason that solely means the criminalisation of consensual intercourse could be enforced is by “peeking through the window”, this may infringe on the best to privateness.
There has been many cases the place members of the LGBTIQ+ group, and even those that the society think about as such however are usually not, have been arrested and subjected to acts of molestation, abuse, torture and other forms of violence and extrajudicial measures which represent a violation of their proper to dignity. Some are even killed. The vigilante teams that impact these arrests even have the behavior of extorting cash from the alleged perpetrators of LGBTIQ+ practices. Where the “suspects” find yourself on the police station, the police have additionally resorted to extortion of huge sums of cash from the suspects earlier than letting them go.
The regulation seeks to avert such occurrences by imposing a time period of imprisonment of between six months to a few years for anybody who harasses somebody accused of being LGBTIQ+. However, it is a feeble try by the sponsors of the invoice to appease or guarantee the LGBTIQ+ group.
The ban on offering healthcare assist for trans individuals is more likely to end in discrimination on the best to well being, which is a common proper. The compelled disbandment of LGBTIQ+ associations in Ghana, will represent a violation of the best to freedom of affiliation and freedom of expression, amongst others. It has been abused in a variety of cases and is more likely to be additional abused much more. The provision that seeks to make house owners of digital platforms or bodily premises through which LGBTIQ+ teams organise responsible of selling LGBTIQ+ actions violates the best to freedom of affiliation and expression, amongst others.
Also, the availability on imposing harsh sentences on academics and different educators who discuss LGBTIQ+ within the classroom is more likely to infringe on the best to educational freedom and the best to schooling. Further, the imposition of six to 10 years of imprisonment for anybody who produces, procures, or distributes materials deemed to be selling LGBTIQ+ actions is more likely to result in the abuse of the best to freedom of expression, info and schooling and even press freedom. The similar goes with the availability on criminalising the “public show of romantic relations” between individuals of the identical intercourse, even together with cross-dressing.
What is necessary to additionally word is that the regulation is just not made to limit or violate the rights of the LGBTIQ+ group solely, as famous above with regard to heterosexual. Also, academics, lecturers, media personnel and civil society activists, individuals who share content material over social media platforms, or broadcast content material on LGBTIQ+ are additionally going to be held criminally accountable.
Presidential or constitutional problem
I suggest that President Nana Akufo-Addo shouldn’t assent to the regulation as it’s, counting on article 108 of the 1992 Constitution since, being a non-public members invoice, it has doubtless monetary implications for the state. Thus, counting on article 106, he can refer the invoice to his highest advisory physique (Council of State) for its recommendation. Otherwise, he has the facility to state in a memo to the Speaker of Parliament any particular provisions of the invoice which in his opinion ought to be reconsidered by Parliament.
If he doesn’t, the matter could be taken to a Human Rights Court by a citizen, counting on article 33(5)of the Constitution, which gives that “the rights, duties, declarations and guarantees relating to the fundamental human rights and freedoms specifically mentioned in this Chapter shall not be regarded as excluding others not specifically mentioned which are considered to be inherent in a democracy and intended to secure the freedom and dignity of man.”
The different possibility is to go straight to the Supreme Court to problem the constitutionality of the invoice.
–
Article by: Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua, Associate Professor of Law, University of Ghana.
This article is a republication from The Conversation. Read unique article here.