Private legal practitioner, Mr. Benjamin Tachie Antiedu says the international community may follow the ongoing Supreme Court case on the anti-LGBTQI.
He said the decision by the court to allow for a live telecast of the matter was a good governance practice and will make the interest surrounding the matter high, particularly in the international community.
He noted that the decision by the court to allow cameras into the court was not surprising since we had witnessed two election petitions that were telecast live.
The unique aspect of this scenario, he said, is that this is about a law that Parliament has passed and was waiting for presidential assent on, but there has been disagreement about the law.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday, May 8, 2024, indefinitely adjourned the case against the Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, also known as the Anti-LGBTQ Bill.
The Apex Court held that the documents submitted by the lawyers of the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, contained intemperate language.
It therefore directed the legal team to file new documents.
Justice Torkornoo, the chair of the panel, said each party has the right to present their case as they see fit and reprimanded the speaker’s team, stating, “You have wasted our time and energy for no reason.”
Mr. Antiedu said the substantive matter has not even been dealt with, and what happened on Wednesday was based on preliminary objections.
He said, “The sense of the court is that this is an important matter they want to deal with. We were all happy when this matter was telecast live. But on a more serious note, the international community has more interest in the issue than Ghanaians. The decision to telecast it live may even be for the international community rather than Ghanaians”.
Speaking with Kwabena Agyapong on Frontline on Rainbow Radio 87.5FM, he said granting leave to the parties to go and amend their cases and refile new ones was a step in the right direction.
Meanwhile, he has reiterated that the president can cite any reason why he will refuse to assent to a bill.
“In my opinion and understanding, the President can cite any reason for refusing to assent to a bill. He can wake up one day and tell us that he had a dream and believes the bill will not help us, and that will be sufficient. The only problem is that in our scenario, when the president makes that decision, it ends there. However, there are processes involved that ought to be followed. For example, if he refuses to assent, he has a constitutional duty to write back to Parliament and assign his reasons. That is what we are lacking. But the president can cite any reason for refusing to assent.”
It is not compulsory for a president to assent to a bill. That is the power granted to the president. However, the power was entrusted to him by Ghanaians, and so the people will examine and determine if the powers that were granted to you were used to do things in their interests. That is a political matter to be determined through the political process. Whatever decision the president takes in this particular instance is within his powers. But that is why the constitution has also put in place an election where the people will decide if they will vote for you based on the decisions you took.”
By: Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana
