Parliament has passed the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2025, widely known as the anti-LGBTQ+ bill, after introducing fresh amendments to parts of the legislation.
The bill seeks to criminalise activities related to LGBTQ+ advocacy and promotion in Ghana.
Under the new amendments, lawyers who provide legal services or representation to persons identified as LGBTQ+ will not face punishment under the law.
The revised bill also exempts journalists and media organisations reporting on LGBTQ+ issues as part of their professional duties.
In addition, healthcare professionals, including doctors, psychologists and counsellors offering medical or psychological support to such persons, will not be sanctioned.
Members of the Minority Caucus strongly opposed the amendments during parliamentary proceedings. According to them, the changes raise concerns about the earlier version of the bill that had been submitted for presidential assent under former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo.
Despite the disagreement, Parliament approved the bill after debate on the amendments.
Background to Ghana’s Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill
The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, widely known as the anti-LGBTQ+ bill, has become one of the most debated and controversial pieces of legislation in Ghana’s recent political history.
The bill was introduced to strengthen existing laws against same-sex relations and prohibit the promotion, advocacy, funding and public support of LGBTQ+ activities in Ghana.
Before the bill was introduced, Ghana already had laws criminalising same-sex sexual relations. Section 104 of the Criminal Offences Act criminalises what the law describes as “unnatural carnal knowledge,” a provision that has long been interpreted to include consensual same-sex relations between adults.
However, supporters of the bill argued that the existing law did not go far enough because it did not directly address LGBTQ+ advocacy, activism, public campaigns, funding or organisations.
The legislation was first introduced in Parliament in 2021 as a private members’ bill sponsored by a group of lawmakers led by Sam George, with support from MPs from both sides of Parliament.
The bill quickly gained backing from several religious bodies, traditional leaders and conservative groups, who argued that it was necessary to protect Ghanaian cultural, religious and family values. Supporters also insisted Ghana should resist what they described as growing international pressure to accept LGBTQ+ rights.
The original version of the bill proposed strict sanctions against:
- Same-sex sexual relations
- LGBTQ+ advocacy and promotion
- Formation or funding of LGBTQ+ organisations
- Public displays of same-sex affection
- Media or educational content considered supportive of LGBTQ+ rights
The bill also proposed penalties for individuals and organisations accused of promoting LGBTQ+ activities.
Its introduction sparked intense debate both locally and internationally.
Religious organisations, including the Ghana Catholic Bishops’ Conference, the Christian Council, Pentecostal and Charismatic groups, and some Islamic organisations openly supported the legislation.
On the other hand, human rights organisations, civil society groups, legal experts and international bodies criticised the bill, arguing that it violated constitutional freedoms and fundamental human rights, including freedom of speech, association and equality before the law.
Several foreign governments and international organisations also raised concerns that the bill could damage Ghana’s democratic image and international reputation.
At different stages of the debate, concerns also emerged over the possible economic and diplomatic impact of the legislation. Some analysts warned that passage of the bill could affect Ghana’s relations with development partners, foreign investors and international financial institutions.
The bill went through years of committee reviews, stakeholder consultations and parliamentary debates. Parliament’s Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee received memoranda from religious groups, academics, lawyers, civil society organisations and members of the public.
Discussions largely centred on constitutional rights, freedom of expression, religious beliefs, family values and Ghana’s international obligations.
In February 2024, Parliament first passed the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill and forwarded it to former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo for assent.
However, the bill was not signed into law immediately after several legal challenges were filed at the Supreme Court questioning both the constitutionality of the bill and the procedure used in passing it.
Some petitioners argued that parts of the legislation violated constitutional rights, while others questioned whether Parliament had followed the correct constitutional process for introducing and passing a private members’ bill with financial implications.
The court cases delayed presidential assent and prevented the bill from becoming law.
In 2026, Parliament reconsidered the legislation and introduced new amendments before passing it again.
The revised version includes exemptions for:
- Lawyers providing legal representation to LGBTQ+ persons
- Journalists and media organisations reporting on LGBTQ+ issues
- Medical and mental health professionals offering healthcare or counselling services
Supporters of the amendments argued that they were necessary to protect constitutional rights and professional responsibilities.
However, some Minority MPs opposed the changes, arguing that the amendments suggested the earlier version of the bill had flaws.
Despite the disagreements, Parliament passed the amended Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2025 on Friday, May 29, 2026.
The next major step will depend on presidential assent and any further legal challenges that may arise.
The bill remains one of the most divisive social and political issues in Ghana, continuing to generate strong reactions from politicians, religious groups, civil society organisations, rights advocates and the international community.
