Supreme Court Strikes Out Pro-LGBTQ+ Suit Against Speaker of Parliament

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has dismissed a request that it halts Parliament’s consideration of the anti-gay bill laid before the House.

According to the court, it has not been convinced to issue such an order at this stage since the matters raised will be dealt with in a substantive case in court concerning the same bill.

This follows a case filed by researcher Dr Amanda Odoi who is alleging Parliament’s work on the proposed law is in breach of the constitution.

Dr Odoi is one of two citizens who have sued the Speaker of Parliament and the Attorney General over the anti-LGBTQ+ bill.

Dr Odoi contends that her checks show that the SSpeaker has been served with all relevant court processes, including one asking the court to place an injunction on Parliament’s consideration of the law.

She stated that despite this, the Speaker caused the bill to proceed to its second reading in Parliament, adding that by Mr Bagbin’s conduct in directing or causing Parliament to proceed to a second reading of the bill, in full knowledge of the pending suit and related interlocutory injunction application, the respondent(Mr Bagbin) has disregarded and disrespected the authority of the court.

She indicated that such disregard interferes with the outcome of the pending litigation, brings the administration of justice into disrepute, and undermines public confidence in the judicial system.

At the court on Wednesday, July 19, lawyers for Dr Odoi argued that it was important for the court to put the consideration in Parliament on hold.

Lead counsel Dr Ernest Ako said, “Per the nature of the provision of article 108…assuming this bill goes through and becomes law and money is expended from the consolidated fund, we would not get the money back. Meanwhile, Ghanaians would not get the millions that would have been spent on this law.

“If the application is granted and Parliament does not proceed, and the substantive matter is determined, parliament would just have suffered a little by not proceeding with the bill in the interim,” he stated.

But the Chief State Attorney, Dr Sylvia Aduse, told the court that Dr Odoi’s legal team have failed to show how they will suffer or which right of theirs should be protected in the interim.

“He should have proved this balance of convenience well, but we have not seen any evidence of that. The Speaker is doing his duty and cannot be injuncted,” She said.

On his part, a lawyer for the Speaker, Thaddeus Sory, urged the court to dismiss the application.

“We pray that this application doesn’t satisfy any of the tests as set by this court and should be dismissed.”

The nine-member panel presided over by Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo after considering the application indicated that a case meriting an injunction was not made.

“We have considered the merits of this case and are of the considered view that a prima facie case has not been made to convince us to injunct the work of parliament.

“Neither have we been convinced to injunct an uncompleted work of parliament. The issues raised by this application for injunction are matters to be determined by the substantive matter. This application for an injunction is dismissed.” the Chief Justice stated.

The Other panel members are Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, Gabriel Pwamang, Mariama Owusu, Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu, Yonny Kulendi, Barbara Ackah-Yensu, Samuel Asiedu, George Koomson.

Meanwhile, Dr Odoi’s legal team have withdrawn the contempt case filed against the Speaker of Parliament.