Parliament has rescinded its earlier decision to pass the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2025, following the discovery of inconsistencies between decisions taken by the House and the version of the legislation drafted after its third reading.
The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Bagbin, announced the decision on Tuesday, November 10, explaining that the inconsistencies were identified by the Legislation Drafting Department during its review of the bill.
He said the errors could not be corrected by the drafters because they involved decisions already taken by Parliament and would therefore require the House to reconsider them.
“It’s important I draw attention to why this is being done. This is being done because after the third reading, there’s a department here we refer to as the Legislation Drafting Department. They are the drafters who draft all what we do here, the decisions we take. And so they do what they call tracking,” he told the House.
Speaker Bagbin explained that although minor drafting errors could be corrected by the department, changes involving decisions of Parliament could not be made without the approval of the House.
“If they were just minor errors, the draft people could put them right. But once they are decisions, they cannot tamper with the decision of the House. It has to be brought back for the House to do the proper thing,” he said.
He said the bill had therefore been brought back before Parliament for the House to rescind its earlier decision and reconcile the identified inconsistencies before proceeding with the necessary parliamentary processes.
The Speaker subsequently put the question to members, and the House voted in favour of rescinding its earlier decision on the bill.
“Honourable members, the Ayes have it. The House has accordingly rescinded its earlier decision, which was taken on Friday, 29th May 2026, in respect of the third reading of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2025,” he said.
The bill is expected to return to the House for further consideration, and another passage after the inconsistencies have been reconciled.
Background
Parliament on Friday, May 29, 2026, passed the anti-LGBTQ+ bill in spite of strong opposition by the Minority Caucus, who threatened to withdraw the bill.
The bill was presented to Parliament by the Member of Parliament for Assin South, Rev. John Ntim Fordjour, on behalf of other sponsors of the bill on Thursday, July 24, 2025.
The sponsors are Samuel Nartey George, Emmanuel Kwasi Bedzrah, Helen Adwoa Ntoso, Nurudeen Muhammed Mummuni, Vincent Ekow Assafuah, Alhassan Tampuli Sulemana, Rita Naa Odoley Sowah, Abdul-Karibu Tiah Mahama and Anthony Mmieh.
The Speaker referred the bill to the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs for consideration and report.
Ahead of its passage, the Minority expressed strong opposition and warned to withdraw the bill before it got passed.
They accused the Majority of smuggling an amendment that was never part of what the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs considered – an exemption for certain categories of professionals, individuals and institutions “who are the very perpetrators of the LGBTQ+ practices”.
However, after the passage, the Speaker of Parliament said that he was taken aback by the passage of the Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill, while he was away on official duties.
The Speaker said he had expected legislators to only begin consideration of the bill on Friday, May 29, and not complete all the stages required for its passage before his return.
Speaking on the developments surrounding the controversial legislation, Mr Bagbin explained on Monday, June 1, that before he departed for other official engagements, he had instructed the House to commence deliberations on the bill.
However, he said he was later surprised to learn that Parliament had gone beyond the initial stages and approved the legislation.
“And in fact, when it was passed on Friday, it was even a surprise to me, because I knew that they were going to start the consideration of the bill, and that was the instruction I left before I went to attend to other meetings,” he stated.
According to the Speaker, he anticipated that parliamentary proceedings on the bill would extend beyond Friday, especially given the complexity of the legislation and the time required for detailed consideration.
“It was Friday, and members wanted to go home early to their constituencies…and I knew they would not have completed it. But all of a sudden I read about this passage, I reacted, and later I saw on TV all the things that happened,” he added.