The Parliament of Ghana has passed the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025 commonly referred to as anti-LGBTQ+ bill in spite of strong opposition by the Minority Caucus, who threatened to withdraw the bill prior to passage on Friday (May 29, 2026).
The object of the Private Members’ bill is to provide for human sexual rights and family values and related matters.
It is to align with the Ghana’s legal framework with deeply rooted cultural, religious and traditional beliefs and to explicitly prohibit LGBTQ+ activities.
It will also criminalise advocacy, promotion and funding related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (or Questioning).
The bill was presented to Parliament by the Member of Parliament for Assin South, Rev. John Ntim Fordjour, on behalf of other sponsors of the bill on Thursday, July 24, 2025.
The sponsors are Samuel Nartey George, Emmanuel Kwasi Bedzrah, Helen Adwoa Ntoso, Nurudeen Muhammed Mummuni, Vincent Ekow Assafuah, Alhassan Tampuli Sulemana, Rita Naa Odoley Sowah, Abdul-Karibu Tiah Mahama and Anthony Mmieh.
The Speaker referred the bill to the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs for consideration and report.
Why the bill?
The sponsors indicated that the country was united in support of the passage of the bill as it seeks to uphold the morality, culture, traditions and customs of Ghanaians.
They affirmed that both Ghanaians and the Constitution recognise the family unit as comprising a male and a female who are joined in marriage and have procreated children.
The sponsors were further of the view that over the years, the country has come under significant pressure from globalisation and foreign cultures to accept practices such as LGBTQ+ activities which were inconsistent with Ghanaian family values and sexual norms.
Smuggling exemptions
But ahead of its passage, the Minority expressed strong opposition and warned to withdraw the bill before it got passed.
They accused the Majority of smuggling an amendment that was never part of what the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs considered – an exemption for certain categories of professionals, individuals and institutions “who are the very perpetrators of the LGTBQ+ practices”.
For instance, they said professionals and institutions engaged in acts that infringed on the very offences that “we are introducing into this act”.
They cited doctors, journalists, civil society organisations who promoted anti-gay practices yet they had all been exempted.
“What we are saying is that if an institution, individuals, professionals, are going about their lawful duties, which are not promoting LGBT activities, whether they are lawyers, CHRAJ, journalists, academics, whichever professions, institutions and governmental or non-governmental they are, if those activities are promoting lawful duties or functions, they are already exempted.
“So why would you come in again and introduce new things, smuggle it in, which we, the sponsors, have not agreed to and not discussed with the sponsors.
Accusing the Majority of engaging certain foreign countries that dictated that certain amendment be introduced to protect professionals and institutions that handled those who engaged in LGBT practices, the Minority said “Our worry is about the same people that under this government, they are granting exceptions so that they can conduct acts to promote, advocate, and support activities of LGBT simply because this country gets money from them”.
President will assent bill
Soon after the bill had been passed, the Majority Leader, Mahama Ayariga said it was a promise that was made that the bill would be passed and on passage it would be assented to expressly by President John Dramani Mahama.
“Mr Speaker, for the fact that we have not yet printed a copy of the bill, I would have assured you that this evening the bill would have been assented to without ceremony.
“Unfortunately, the President is out of the jurisdiction and we have not yet printed a copy of the bill for him. But on return to Ghana, I can assure Ghanaians that His Excellency the President will, as promised, assent to this bill and it will come into force,” he said.
Bill not watered-down
Throwing light on the Minority’s opposition to the bill, Mr Ayariga said the proponents of the bill proposed in clauses 9 and 10 that subject to the Constitution, the committee decided to elaborate on the rendition of subject to the Constitution.
“The committee felt that when it comes to the right to counsel and the freedom of lawyers to represent persons accused of offences under the Act, we cannot treat advocacy in that instance as promoting LGBTQ practice,” he said.
In the same way, he said the committee also felt that they should propose to the House that media houses reporting matters relating to LGBTQ should not be accused of the offence of promoting LGBTQ.
“And academics and researchers conducting research into matters of LGBTQ should be free to publish their reports.
“The publication of those reports or research findings should not amount to an offence under this Act,” he said.
Lastly, the committee proposed that when people practising LGBTQ went to the hospital and were attended to by doctors, whether it was counselling, treatment or surgery, “we should not accuse those doctors of promoting or supporting LGBTQ”.
“These are the simple provisions of the recommendations that the committee made to this House and instead of remaining in this chamber for us to discuss it and build a consensus, our colleagues in the Minority have left and they are out there misleading Ghanaians that what is being passed today is a watered-down version of the bill that was presented to President Akufo-Addo to assent.
“That is far from the fact as one of the sponsors of the bill, Rev. Ntim Fordjour allowed the rendition subject to the Constitution and so even if this House had not attempted to elaborate on what subject to the Constitution is, I am convinced that any court would have struck down any attempt to convict a doctor providing medical services to any person involved in LGBTQ,” he said.
The Majority Leader also said he was also convinced that any court in the country would have struck down any attempt to prosecute a media house for reporting on a matter relating to LGBTQ.
Besides, he said he was also convinced that no court would have tolerated the punishment of a lawyer who attempted to provide legal services in defence of a person practising LGBTQ.
“These are the only issues on which the minority is standing to say that the bill has been watered down. This bill is not watered down,” he said.
Double standard
The Minority Leader, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, said the country had witnessed an unprincipled political act by the Majority.
He said while in opposition, NDC MPs resisted any attempt at amending their proposed sponsored bill.
He said the very law that they wanted former President Akufo-Addo to sign, when they were faced with the same law, they amended and diluted that same law.
Such a double standard, he said, did not pass for “a man with principles”.
“It is not enough to say one thing while in opposition and when you get power, you change your stand, thinking that nobody can read through you,” he said.
He pointed out that none of the NDC sponsors of the bill was in the Chamber in spite in of their names advertised in the motions.
He said it was the reason why, without the leave of the House, the Majority Chief Whip moved the motion.
“When it came to motion 42, again, none of the sponsors who could have moved the motion was in to move the motion,” he said.
Background
Parliament of Ghana unanimously passed the bill on Wednesday, February 28, 2024 to provide for proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values, proscribed LGBTQ+ and related activities as well as proscribe propaganda of, advocacy for or promotion for children and person who are victims or accused of LGBTQ+ and related activities.
Unfortunately, due to legal challenges to the passage of the bill, former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo was not able to sign the bill into law.
The bill eventually lapsed (expired) in January 2025 after the desolation of the Eighth Parliament without receiving presidential assent.
The bill was introduced in the Ninth Parliament by the sponsors.
