The Constitution of Ghana Amendment Bill, 2025, has been laid before Parliament for consideration.
The proposed legislation seeks to remove constitutional restrictions that currently bar dual citizens or individuals owing allegiance to another country from holding certain public offices.
Among the positions affected are Ambassador or High Commissioner, Secretary to the Cabinet, Chief of Defence Staff or any Service Chief, and the Inspector General of Police.
Following its First Reading, the First Deputy Speaker, Bernard Ahiafor, referred the bill to the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee for detailed consideration and reporting back to Parliament.
Meanwhile, the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, popularly known as the anti-LGBTQ bill, has been laid before Parliament for consideration.
The proposed legislation seeks to criminalise activities related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. It is being sponsored by 10 Members of Parliament drawn from both the Majority and Minority sides of the House, underscoring its bipartisan backing.
Following its First Reading, the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, referred the bill to the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee for further consideration and report.
Addressing the House on Tuesday, February 17, a lead sponsor of the bill, John Ntim Fordjour, stressed the urgency of its passage. He described the bill as a bipartisan private member’s initiative and urged Parliament and the relevant committees to treat it with dispatch before the House rises.
“It is the expectation of the sponsors which is bipartisan. It is a bipartisan private members’ bill which must be on record. And the expectation is that within this meeting, this honourable house and all relevant committees will attach alacrity to this bill to pass it with urgency before this house rises.
“Because it is not a new bill. It is an old bill which has gone through all the processes, consultations and already survived a plethora of legal and dissenting opinions. And has gone all the way to supreme court and held that no aspect of this bill affronts any aspect of our constitution,” he said.
