Afenyo-Markin blocks LGBTQ+ bill over custodial sentencing concerns

On February 15, 2024, 5:30 PM

The Effutu Member of Parliament, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, has blocked the LGBTQ+ bill, which is currently under consideration in Parliament.

Despite supporting the bill’s principles, the Deputy Majority Leader, objects to the provision that mandates imprisonment for individuals engaged in LGBTQ+ activities.

During the bill’s third reading in Parliament on Thursday, February 15, Afenyo-Markin raised concerns about the proposed custodial sentences.

He argued that incarceration would not address the behavioral aspects of LGBTQ+ issues and suggested that alternative approaches, such as community service or fines, should be considered instead.

“The essence of this motion is to allow this august house to thoroughly consider amendments that are proposed in the bill with the view of substituting community service for incarceration. The issue before us is behavioral, and it is my humble view that in dealing with behavioral matters, incarceration is not the solution,” he indicated.

It will be recalled that Parliament, in early February 2024, approved a custodial sentence of three to five years for any willful promotion, sponsorship, or support of LGBTQ+ activities.

Those caught engaging in LGBTQ+ activities are to face a minimum sentence of six months and a maximum of three years.

However, the lead proponent of the anti-gay bill and MP for Ningo Prampram, Samuel Nartey George, defended the inclusion of custodial sentences.

He indicated that laws are meant to serve as deterrents and argued against the notion that imprisonment would not lead to reform.

“It makes absolutely no sense to say that because we want to reform people, we shouldn’t imprison them. Then why are we imprisoning anybody for any of the crimes in Ghana?”

“Don’t we want the reform of any other person who falls foul before the law? Laws are passed not just for reforms. Laws are passed to act as a precaution so that people know that once they do this, there is a penalty,” he argued.

He maintained that the Deputy Majority Leader’s argument simply does not hold water.