Minority accuses government of contradiction over Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill

Minority in parliament has accused the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC) of contradicting its earlier position on the country’s controversial anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, following significant amendments to the bill in Parliament.

In a strongly worded statement issued on 4 June 2026, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Minority in Parliament said the NDC had shifted from demanding swift presidential assent for the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill in 2024 to presiding over what it described as a substantially revised version of the same legislation after taking office.

The caucus described the development as a “glaring contradiction”, accusing the governing party of political inconsistency on a highly sensitive national issue.

“It is therefore both strange and hypocritical for the NDC to have demanded immediate presidential assent to the 2024 Bill, only to return to Parliament and substantially rewrite that same Bill upon assuming office,” the statement said.

According to the Minority, the bill has undergone 31 amendments in the current Parliament, significantly altering the version originally passed in 2024.

It argued that the NDC, while in opposition, had mounted a sustained public campaign criticising delays in presidential assent, accusing the then-government of moral failure and mobilising public and religious support for the legislation.

Now in government, the Minority says the party is overseeing changes that amount to a reversal of that position.

The NPP further claims the sequence of events, which it says is supported by parliamentary records, reflects a pattern of political opportunism on a matter of deep cultural and religious significance.

The caucus has called for the 2024 version of the bill to be restored and transmitted for presidential assent.

The statement signed by the minority leader, Osahen Alexander Kwamena Afenyo-Markin also referenced what it described as mixed signals within the governing party over the bill’s progress, including differing public remarks from senior officials on parliamentary procedure and timing.

President John Dramani Mahama has recently suggested in public remarks that procedural concerns may have affected the bill’s passage, while parliamentary leadership has offered differing interpretations of the next steps. The government has not issued a detailed response to the Minority’s latest allegations.

The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill remains one of Ghana’s most divisive pieces of legislation, drawing strong political, religious and civil society interest since its introduction.

Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill — What it proposes and why it is controversial

The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill—often referred to as an anti-LGBTQ+ bill is one of the most debated pieces of proposed legislation in the country’s recent history.

What the bill proposes

The bill seeks to criminalise a range of activities linked to LGBTQ+ identity and advocacy. It proposes penalties for individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, as well as for those who engage in same-sex relationships.

It also extends beyond individuals to cover what it describes as “promotion, advocacy and funding” of LGBTQ+ activities. This includes public support, campaigning, or the work of organisations seen as advancing LGBTQ+ rights.

In addition, the legislation contains provisions targeting so-called “conversion practices”, as well as restrictions on public education and media content related to sexual orientation and gender identity.

Supporters of the bill say it is intended to protect Ghanaian cultural, religious and family values, and reflects the views of a large section of the population.

Why it is controversial

The bill has drawn strong criticism from human rights groups, sections of the international community, and legal experts, who argue that it could significantly restrict civil liberties and freedom of expression.

Opponents say criminalising identity and advocacy could expose LGBTQ+ people and activists to discrimination, harassment and imprisonment, while also discouraging access to health and social services.

There are also concerns about its potential impact on freedom of association and speech, particularly for journalists, educators and civil society organisations.

Legal debates have also focused on constitutional questions, including whether some provisions conflict with Ghana’s protections on human rights and due process.

The political context

The bill has become a politically sensitive issue in Ghana, with major parties historically taking strong public positions. Support for it has often been framed in moral and cultural terms, while opposition is frequently linked to human rights and constitutional arguments.

However, the legislative process has been complex, with repeated revisions, delays, and competing interpretations of parliamentary procedure.

Why it matters

Beyond the legal text, the bill has become a wider symbol of Ghana’s ongoing debate over tradition, religion, governance, and international expectations on human rights.

It remains one of the most divisive legislative proposals in the country, with strong views on all sides and significant implications for law, society and Ghana’s global relationships.