Ghana’s First Special Prosecutor, Martin Amidu, is of the view that in order to settle the debate on the anti-gay bill, there should be a referendum to ascertain whether the people of Ghana are for or against the bill.
Ghana’s Parliament passed the anti-gay bill today, February 28, 2024.
The bill will be sent to the President of Ghana, who is expected to sign it into law.
In the past few months, the president has refused to sign a private member bill passed by parliament because of a supposed financial obligation that comes with it.
Under the new bill, a maximum five-year jail term for forming or funding LGBTQ+ groups will be slapped on persons found guilty.
Lawmakers did not agree to replace the prison term with community service and counselling.
The bill which was supported by both political parties in Parliament, had the backing of the Christian community, the Muslim community, and the traditional community.
It could be remembered that the Speaker was petitioned to allow for public voting to ensure that legislators who voted against it were made known.
In his latest article, Martin Amidu indicated that claims that the people of Ghana have collectively decided that the anti-gay bill being passed into law can only be confirmed by organizing a referendum.
“In my humble view, in such circumstances, the most reasonable and demonstrable way of
showing that Ghanaians have decided as a collective to depart from the paraphrased words of
the late President Mills when the Daily Graphic reported that: “President Mills, however, said
Ghana did not discriminate against gays, and lesbians, since there was no witch-hunting, and
stressed that nobody had gone hunting for them, while nobody had been denied a job in
Ghana because he was gay”, is to submit a question to the electorate at a referendum properly
organized for the purpose to determine whether the majority of electors support the “witchhunting” and “discrimination against gays and lesbians” as the NDC has sought to do in a private members bill with the support of so called religious bodies to upend the existing law
on unnatural carnal knowledge under Section 104 of Act 29 for purely political electioneering purposes.”
Mynewsgh.com