The nation finds itself divided over the controversial Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill—commonly referred to as the anti-LGBT bill.
In an interview aired just days before the election, President John Dramani Mahama responded cautiously to questions about whether he would sign the bill into law.
His statement that “it depends on what is in the Bill” has sparked further debate, highlighting the complexity and widespread concern over its implications. Mahama further suggested that a thorough review of the bill’s content is essential, with the President required to outline any objections and potentially seek advice from the Council of State.
As discussions around the bill intensify, the public is being urged to engage with its contents. Billboards across the country have been plastered with the slogan “Ego Reach We All”—meaning “it is going to affect all of us”—a call to action for Ghanaians to carefully read and understand the bill. The campaign warns of severe penalties, including potential imprisonment of up to 10 years for sharing certain views on public platforms, in accordance with clause 10(3) of the proposed legislation.
But why is it so important for Ghanaians to read the bill? Those who fail to do so may remain unaware of its far-reaching effects on freedom of expression, personal interaction, and even the potential legal consequences of certain behaviours. Critics argue that the bill’s sweeping provisions go far beyond targeting specific lifestyles; it could criminalize simple acts of kindness, such as offering support to someone whose lifestyle doesn’t align with the bill’s defined family values. The bill, which criminalizes interactions with individuals deemed to “hold out” as defying these family values, has left many questioning the extent to which it encroaches on personal freedoms.
The bill defines “proper family values” in rigid terms, stating that marriage between a man and a woman is the fundamental building block of society. It stresses that such unions must be lifelong, and that individuals—including parents, teachers, and guardians—must actively promote and uphold these values. A striking feature of the bill is its stipulation that individuals report any suspected violations of these values, which could extend to a broad range of actions, from how someone dresses to who they associate with. In a society already grappling with diverse views, this provision has sparked fears of creating an environment where conformity to narrowly defined values is enforced by law.
The proposed bill also outlines severe consequences for those found to be in violation of these “family values,” with those expressing tolerance for alternative lifestyles facing imprisonment. A social media post or radio broadcast in support of marriage equality, for example, could lead to criminal charges and a prison sentence of up to 10 years. This could lead to heavy censorship of media outlets and stifle open discourse across various platforms.
But the most concerning aspect of the bill, many argue, is the broad obligation it places on individuals and institutions to report anyone who deviates from the prescribed norms. For example, landlords, medical professionals, or legal services could be held liable for failing to report individuals they suspect of engaging in behaviours that defy the bill’s restrictive family values. Medical professionals, including doctors and counsellors, might be required to disclose the sexual orientation of their patients, potentially pushing marginalized individuals away from essential services and support.
Even family members could face criminal charges for failing to report loved ones they believe to be engaging in activities or exhibiting behaviours deemed contrary to these values. The bill’s provision for reporting based on factors such as clothing, speech, or mannerisms has raised concerns about its potential to infringe on privacy rights and establish a culture of surveillance that could deepen social divisions.
In conclusion, the Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill stands as a pivotal moment for Ghana, with far-reaching implications for personal freedoms, freedom of expression, and societal tolerance. While the bill may have been designed with a focus on restricting certain lifestyles, its broad language and the severe penalties attached to its provisions risk undermining fundamental democratic principles. The question that remains is not only whether the bill targets particular groups but whether it erodes the democratic foundations that allow for diverse viewpoints and personal freedoms.
For Ghanaians, understanding the bill’s content is no longer just a matter of curiosity—it is a critical step toward safeguarding their rights, freedoms, and the values of openness and diversity that have shaped the country’s society. The growing #Egoreachweall campaign is calling on Ghanaians to look closely at this bill before it is too late. Ignorance of its contents, some argue, could prove to be a costly mistake for all.