Professor John Gatsi, Dean of the University of Cape Coast Business School, has criticised the position of President Akufo-Addo to defer assenting to the anti-LGBTQ+ bill after a Supreme Court ruling on the matter.
President Akufo-Addo, in his initial remarks following the passage of the Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill by Parliament, noted that Ghanaians hold hands while awaiting the decision from the Supreme Court before “any action is taken”.
But Prof. Gatsi, speaking on TV3’s Ghana Tonight programme on March 4, questioned the basis of the President’s assertion because the bill is yet to become law, adding, “When E-levy [Electronic Transaction Service Levy] was sent to court, the President still went ahead to sign the E-levy bill into law”.
“What is so significant or strange about this bill that the bill has not even matured into law and some people are seeking some explanation to be provided by the Supreme Court about this bill?” he quizzed.
According to Prof. Gatsi, the country is not yet at the point of Supreme Court interpretation, stating, “We don’t have a law so to speak, because technically we have not completed the process”.
He also maintained that all the happenings following the passage of the bill are to ensure that the bill does not receive presidential assent to become law.
He stressed that there is a heavy dose of lobbying activity going on against the signing of the anti-LGBTQ+ bill.
“It sounds like there is a heavy dose of lobbying activities going on [in] these last minutes of the process. We knew that the constituents of the world that are not happy with the stand of Ghana on LGBTQ were very clear. All attempts were made to stop the process in parliament that didn’t happen”, he said, adding that the international community, having seen the signs of a unanimous decision to pass the bill in parliament, has occasioned “the upscale of lobbying activities across the board”.
Western powers using Finance Ministry to lobby Akufo-Addo not to sign anti-LGBTQ+ bill – Prof. John Gatsi
“And now they are using our own finance ministry to blackmail Ghanaians to support the President not to sign the bill”, Prof. Gatsi added.
Meanwhile, the Finance Ministry has urged President Akufo-Addo not to assent to the anti-LGBTQ+ bill. The Ministry, in a statement, emphasised that Ghana could lose over US$3.8 billion in World Bank financing should the bill be enacted into law.
Some of the areas the Finance Ministry feared World Bank financing could be cut include the US$300 million First Ghana Resilient Recovery Development Policy Operation.
Another US$300 million on-going negotiation for the Second Ghana Resilient Recovery Development Policy Operation, and another US$250 million for the Ghana Financial Stability Fund.
Also, the finance ministry feared the disbursement of US$2.1 billion for on-going projects and another US$900 million worth of projects would cease when the bill becomes law.
Source: 3news.com
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Peacefmonline.com. Peacefmonline.com accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content. Please report any inappropriate content to us, and we will evaluate it as a matter of priority. |
Prof was my mate in Legon. He is such a brilliant guy and i used to agree with him on many issues but on this occasion i differ from his assertions, both as a lawyer and academia; 1. The e-levy bill was a levy which could be rectified if the supreme court had said it was enacted in error and could also order a refund in the event of any collections based on the declared void law, if that happened to be the case after a ruling. 2. The Anti-Gay Bill is mainly on human rights which if passed into law and 'violated', can NEVER be restored. The best is to pay compensation, and that will be on the state. 3. The Constitution permits a course of action where a human right is LIKELY to be violated. The violation doesn't have to happen or the bill doesn't have to be a law before the violation can be prevented. so it will depend on the grounds for the action. IT IS NOT FOR INTERPRETATION...... As to whether or not it is likely to violate human rights, it is the duty of the Supreme Court to determine. N/B: This is to correct the inaccuracies and not intended to express a position on the Bill. thank you
Was this Prof around during the NDC Dumsor? What did he suggest to them to help the country? All of a sudden everybody wants to talk when Npp is in power.
Go away, with your fake PhD from Central Nicaragua University. Where is that Uni sef? Your inaugural lecture was just empty politics; you couldn't demonstrate anything you had done in scholarship to merit that space for lecture ... mtcheew