Anti-gay bill: Justice Srem-Sai writes on Akufo-Addo’s Decision to Wait for Supreme Court case
In a compelling twist to Ghana’s legal narrative surrounding the controversial Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, commonly referred to as the anti-gay Bill, Justice Srem-Sai, a distinguished constitutional lawyer, has shed light on President Akufo-Addo’s decision to pause presidential assent in anticipation of a Supreme Court ruling.
This decision came into the spotlight following a legal challenge initiated by private citizen Richard Sky, who filed a writ against the passage of the Bill, arguing it contravened various constitutional liberties and rights.
The Bill, which was passed by Parliament on February 28, has since been mired in legal and ethical debates, particularly with Richard Sky’s petition to the Supreme Court seeking to prevent the President from assenting to the Bill on constitutional grounds.
This move underscores a broader discussion on the constitutional mechanisms and the President’s obligations amidst ongoing legal proceedings.
Justice Srem-Sai, in his analysis, pointed out a critical distinction between deferring the presidential assent due to pending litigation and the inherent constitutional duties of the President.
According to him, no existing law justifies the President’s decision to delay his constitutional mandate based on an ongoing case filed by a citizen.
His argument delves into the nuances of the constitutionality of bills and bill-related matters, highlighting that the Supreme Court has historically differentiated between challenges to the substance of a bill and disputes related to the legislative process.
The distinction Srem-Sai makes between a bill per se and bill-related controversies is crucial. He elucidates that while the constitutionality of a bill itself may not be directly challenged until it becomes law, the processes and procedures leading to its enactment are open to scrutiny for potential constitutional violations.
This distinction opens the door for the Supreme Court to intervene in legislative processes if they’re found to contravene the Constitution, even before a bill is enacted into law.
Srem-Sai’s discourse raises fundamental questions about the balance between legislative autonomy and judicial oversight, the doctrine of separation of powers, and the potential implications of preemptive legal challenges on the legislative process.
ALSO READ: Anti LGBTQ+ Bill: ‘It’s senseless to imprison gays’ – Franklin Cudjoe
His perspective offers a critical examination of the President’s response to the legal challenge posed by the anti-gay Bill, urging a reevaluation of the role of the executive in the face of constitutional and legal disputes.
The ongoing saga not only highlights the contentious nature of the anti-gay Bill but also brings to the forefront the intricate dance between Ghana’s legislative, executive, and judicial branches in navigating constitutional responsibilities and rights.
As the nation awaits the Supreme Court’s decision, the discourse initiated by Justice Srem-Sai emphasizes the importance of adhering to constitutional mandates and the potential for legal precedents in shaping Ghana’s legislative and judicial landscape.
Read His Full Post on Twitter here
Share Our Post on The Topic ‘Anti-gay bill: Justice Srem-Sai writes on Akufo-Addo’s decision to wait for Supreme Court case.’