Supreme Court judge nominee Professor Richard Frimpong Oppong has opined that a man should not be allowed to marry his fellow man, nor should a woman be allowed to do the same.
The law professor was grilled before
Parliament’s Appointment Committee on Tuesday, August 13, 2024, during his vetting.
He was questioned by members of the committee about research he had authored on LGBTQI+ activities in Africa.
Several members on the committee questioned him on whether he would not side with members who are opposed to the anti-LGBTQI+ Bill and strike out cases when he is approved and gets the opportunity to preside over them.
It was also established that the National Security Council had informed the committee about his research work and its implications for the Supreme Court bench.
The responsibility of judges, he argued, is to apply the law and not espouse their personal views through their judgements, since that would be totally wrong as a member of the judiciary.
When asked specifically if he believes in water, a man should be granted the right to be married to a fellow man, he answered the negative, stating that “no.”.
In response to a question on who funded the research titled ‘Foreign Same-Sex Marriages Before Commonwealth African Courts’, the nominee mentioned the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada, which he explained funds all forms of academic research activities without any agenda attached to them or dedicated to any specific course.
Professor Richard Frimpong Oppong also shot down suggestions that he would be a dangerous addition to the bench if approved.
One of the sponsors of the anti-LGBTQI+ Bill, South Dayi MP, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, put it to the nominee that he was a danger to the crusade against LGBTQI+ activities; hence, when he joins the bench and is assigned to join the judges who will preside over the case, he will strike it out.
In the abstract of the research, the nominee stated that same-sex relationships will likely be in violation of the laws of most African countries.
Citing Ghana, Kenya, and Nigeria as examples, he opined that a same-sex relationship is either explicitly prohibited or there is legislation that can be interpreted to prohibit the union.
“However, the growing trend of the institutionalisation of same-sex marriage around the world means that evenCountries that do not domestically recognise same-sex relationships may be confronted.with the challenge of dealing with it in a conflict of law context. The discussion showsthat the strict application of the rule of non-recognition, where the court gives no legaleffect on a foreign same-sex union, is unworkable, and leads to arbitrary and unfair results.”
He had also suggested that “African courts should use the incident approach to differentiate between cases where the parties seek adversarial court procedures, such as those dividing marital property, fromthose that seek to legitimise the union”.
Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, referring to the research work, put it to the nominee that he would be in a position to strike the case down based on his views on the matter.
The MP said: “As a sponsor of the bill, I think you will be a danger when you get onto the bench in terms of our anti-LGBTQ activities. There is a confidential report that suggests that. And I am saying that, when you get the opportunity, you will be striking down these laws because that is the justificational mandate of the Supreme Court.”.
The nominee responding shot down the assertions made by the MP and committee member.
The nominee responded, “I think I really reject the idea that if I get to the SC, I will be a danger to anything that you are talking about.”.
He stated categorically that if he is approved as a judge of the SC, his responsibility would be to apply the laws of Ghana.
By: Rainbowradioonline.com/Ghana
