Sam George, a co-sponsor of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, has fired shots at the Speaker of Parliament, Alban Bagbin, after he appealed for the reconsideration of the passed anti-LGBTQ+ Bill.
According to Sam George, Parliament is a House of rules and not a House of appeals.
He disclosed that the Speaker’s suggestion for a reconsideration of the bill is not supported by parliamentary procedure.
Sam George argued that the only role Parliament has now is to transmit the bill to the President, where the President has indicated he would want to scrutinise the bill.
Speaking to journalists at the 4th Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Family, Sovereignty and Values, Sam George stated, “The Speaker has made an appeal. I have gone through the Standing Orders since I saw that appeal, and there is nothing in our Standing Orders for a rescission. When Parliament passes a bill, Parliament is functus officio.
“The only role Parliament has today is to transmit the bill to the President. When it goes to the President, the President has indicated he would want to scrutinise the bill. The Constitution spells out the steps the President can take,” he said.
“Parliament is a House of rules. Respectfully to Mr. Speaker, it is not a House of appeals. If there is no rule in the rule book that allows what is being sought, then we proceed by the rules we have,” he added.
Also, Mahama Ayariga, the Majority Leader, has boldly stated that the Speaker Alban Bagbin cannot overturn Parliament’s decision to pass the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, commonly known as the anti-LGBTQ bill.
According to Mahama Ayariga, the house acted within its standing orders and rejected suggestions that the bill was improperly passed.
He noted that the Speaker’s intervention amounts only to an appeal for reconsideration as there is nothing to reconsider.
“The Speaker is only appealing. He cannot in any way reverse what has happened. What has happened has happened. We have passed many bills the same way, and indeed there was no rule that was breached at all,” Ayariga stated.
“If you check the Votes and Proceedings, you will see clearly that the procedural motion was moved and allowed by the First Deputy Speaker. We abridged time and that enabled us to take the bill through the third consideration stage. So there was absolutely no breach of procedure,” he said.
“The Honourable Ntim Fordjour could not have withdrawn the bill. He was not the only sponsor. There were several other sponsors, so whatever he threatened to do or not do had no effect whatsoever on the bill and its consideration by the House,” he added.
Also, Mahama Ayariga has stressed that his responsibility ended once Parliament approved the legislation and that decisions regarding its transmission for presidential assent.
He argued that the bill, with about 19 clauses, had already undergone extensive consideration, adding that the disagreements were limited and had largely been resolved through committee deliberations.
Mahama Ayariga added, “We worked with our colleagues on the entire bill from clause one to clause nine. There was no issue. Even where concerns were raised, the committee made recommendations, and we engaged and agreed on several of them”.
“We have kept this bill in this House for one and a half years, and now we are being asked to bring it back again and consider what exactly? I don’t know specifically what provisions need reconsideration. I have done my job. I have moved for the bill to be passed. As for whether it will be transmitted for assent or not, that is their business,” he said.
🚨 An okada rider reportedly got into an altercation with firefighters after alleging that a fire service truck stationed at the Tudu scene had no water, a claim that is said to have triggered the confrontation.#GHNow pic.twitter.com/XE1RfCVV0b
— GHnow (@ghnow_) June 4, 2026
