President John Dramani Mahama faces a critical constitutional decision regarding the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025. Parliament is expected to send the bill to the President later this month for his approval, known as assent. President Mahama must decide whether to sign the bill into law or send it back to Parliament. The core of his potential rejection might not be the bill's social content. Instead, it could be procedural concerns rooted in Articles 106 and 108 of Ghana's 1992 Constitution.
Article 106 outlines how bills become law. It allows the President to return a bill with objections. Parliament can then reconsider it. Speaker Alban Bagbin has already raised questions about how the bill was processed. President Mahama has echoed some of these concerns. However, these claims are disputed. Majority Chief Whip Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor insists all parliamentary rules were followed. These include rules on quorum, voting, and general legislative procedure.
Article 108, however, presents a different kind of constitutional challenge. It follows a tradition from the British Parliament. This rule states that Parliament cannot consider a bill if it costs public money or increases government spending. Such bills must be introduced by or on behalf of the President. The key question is whether the LGBTQ bill creates enough financial obligations to trigger Article 108. Supporters claim the costs are minor. They say existing government departments will handle any expenses. Critics argue the bill’s requirements are significant. These include lengthy prison sentences of up to 10 years. Those jailed would be supported by public funds. The bill also demands mandatory public education and rehabilitation programs. It also requires ongoing institutional monitoring. These provisions clearly restructure national spending, they contend.
Adding to the complexity, Ghana's Supreme Court has not yet clarified Article 108's meaning. In December 2024, the Court dismissed early legal challenges to the bill. It ruled that such challenges were too soon. The Court noted that the bill was still going through Parliament. However, it did not rule on whether the bill met Article 108's requirements. It also did not approve Parliament's interpretation of the article. This constitutional question remains open.
Recent actions by previous administrations support the significance of Article 108. Under President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, this article was used to block private members' bills with financial impacts. In 2023, he refused to sign two similar bills. These were the Witchcraft Accusation Bill and the Armed Forces Amendment Bill. His reasons were procedural, not about the bill's content. He stated both bills had financial implications. Therefore, they needed presidential sponsorship. Additionally, in 2023, Attorney General Godfred Dame stated the LGBTQ bill likely violated Article 108. He flagged this when the bill was at the committee stage. While President Akufo-Addo’s or Dame’s opinions are not final rulings, they show a growing understanding. This understanding is that laws with significant financial consequences need executive approval. Therefore, President Mahama would build on existing precedent. He would not be creating a new constitutional argument.
This precedent does not definitively rule on Article 108 or the current bill. However, it strengthens the argument that President Mahama's objection would have a constitutional basis. He would not be using a novel or politically motivated argument. The interplay between Article 108 and Article 106 is also important. Article 106 allows the President to send a bill back. This can happen if specific legislative processes are not followed. Concerns about quorum and voting procedures could also be raised. The combination of potential Article 108 issues and procedural questions offers a strong basis for the President's reconsideration. The ultimate decision will shape Ghana's legislative process and its fiscal responsibilities.