Legal practitioner and activist Osagyefo Oliver Barker-Vormawor has disputed claims by Assin South MP John Ntim Fordjour that the recently reintroduced Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill is substantially identical to the version previously presented to former President Nana Akufo-Addo for assent.
According to Barker-Vormawor, assertions that the National Democratic Congress (NDC) weakened the legislation are not supported by a close examination of the text. He argues that the latest bill contains numerous modifications and cannot accurately be described as the same document that was previously before the President.
Barker-Vormawor disclosed that in March 2026, his law firm, Merton & Everett LLP, conducted a detailed legal analysis of the bill when it was introduced by its sponsors. The review concluded that several significant alterations had been made compared to the 2024 version.
“It’s not true that they brought back the same thing,” Barker-Vormawor stated, noting that his firm’s assessment identified at least 27 discrete textual and structural changes between the two versions. He added that if changes were counted using the methodology currently being cited by proponents of the bill, the figure could exceed 64 amendments.
Structural Changes
Among the key structural modifications identified were the reduction of the legislation from 20 sections to 19 clauses and the addition of an expanded explanatory memorandum running approximately 19 pages. The memorandum reportedly includes legislative history, constitutional arguments, international law considerations, and detailed clause-by-clause explanations.
The analysis also highlighted the removal of a standalone offence concerning the subversion of family values, as well as the deletion of a separate offence criminalising the instigation, counselling, procurement, or encouragement of acts deemed to undermine family values.
Changes to Criminal Offences
The review found that several offence-creating provisions were reformulated. These included clauses dealing with procuration, detention, brothel operations, gross indecency, void marriages, and the funding, sponsorship, or promotion of prohibited activities.
While many of the associated penalties remained unchanged, Barker-Vormawor noted that the drafting approach shifted from direct offence-creating language to prohibition-based provisions accompanied by separate penalty clauses. In some instances, additional sentencing requirements were introduced, including minimum custodial terms.
Expansion of Scope
According to the analysis, the new bill broadens its application in several areas. The term “queer” has been added to the list of identities covered by the legislation, while new catch-all provisions have been introduced to criminalise identities or expressions considered contrary to the binary categories of male and female.
The report also points to expanded restrictions in adoption provisions and revised provisions dealing with propaganda and advocacy.
Concerns Regarding Intersex Persons
One of the most significant concerns raised relates to the treatment of intersex persons under the proposed law.
Barker-Vormawor argues that the introduction of a formal definition of “intersex,” combined with provisions concerning non-binary identities, could potentially expose some intersex individuals to criminal liability if they do not undergo surgical procedures to conform to binary sex classifications.
He contends that while the legislation permits medical interventions to correct what it describes as biological abnormalities, it does not explicitly protect intersex status itself. As a result, some individuals could be vulnerable to prosecution depending on how the law is interpreted and enforced.
New Definitions Introduced
The analysis identified several new definitions added to the interpretation section of the bill. These include definitions for:
Intersex
Non-binary
Pansexual
Pansexual activity
Queer
Additionally, the definitions of “gay” and “lesbian” have been expanded to include romantic activity alongside sexual activity.
The definition of marriage has also been revised to specify that marriage is a union between a man and a woman whose sexes are determined at birth.
Debate Continues
The findings have added a new dimension to the ongoing public debate surrounding the Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill. While supporters of the legislation maintain that the current version reflects the original intent of the bill, critics argue that substantial textual and legal changes have been made, raising important questions about its scope, interpretation, and potential impact.
As discussions continue, Barker-Vormawor maintains that any assessment of the legislation must be based on a detailed examination of its contents rather than claims that it remains unchanged from the version previously submitted for presidential assent.
This version is structured in a neutral newspaper style, preserving the substance of Barker-Vormawor’s arguments while presenting them as reported claims and analysis rather than established fact.
