The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed a case filed by media personality Richard Dela Sky and Dr. Amanda Odoi, a researcher at the University of Ghana, challenging the passage of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, widely known as the Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill.

In its ruling, the apex court stated that the case was premature, as the bill had not yet become law.

Presiding Judge Justice Lovelace Johnson explained that a bill cannot be subjected to judicial review of its constitutionality until it has received presidential assent and becomes an enacted law.

Richard Sky’s petition argued that the bill violated several provisions of the 1992 Constitution, including Articles 33(5), 12(1) and (2), 15(1), 17(1) and (2), 18(2), and 21(1)(a)(b)(d), and (e).

Among the eight reliefs sought was a declaration that the Speaker of Parliament violated Article 108(a)(ii) by allowing the passage of a bill that imposes financial obligations on the Consolidated Fund or other public resources.

Sky also sought an injunction to prevent the implementation of the bill, describing it as unconstitutional and a misuse of legislative authority.

However, the court found no merit in his claims and dismissed the case in its entirety.

The decision reaffirms that judicial scrutiny of a bill’s constitutionality can only occur once it becomes law.