Supreme Court rules that a law that forbids anal intercourse is constitutional

The rule that forbids unnatural carnal knowledge, such as anal intercourse, has been deemed constitutional by a seven-member Supreme Court panel led by Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie.

A petition contesting the validity of Section 104 (1) (b) of the Criminal Offenses Act, 1960 (Act 29) was unanimously dismissed by the panel.

Dr. Obiri-Korang, a law lecturer, filed a lawsuit against the Attorney General, requesting a ruling on the constitutionality of section 104(1)(b) of the Criminal and Offenses Act 1960 (Act 29), among other things.

Justices Omoro Amadu Tanko, Ernest Gaewu, Adjei-Frimpong, Avril Lovelace-Johnson, Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi, and Yaw Darko Asare have postponed their reasons till a later time on Justice Baffoe-Bonnie’s panel.

In addition to arguing that section 104(1)(b) of Act 29 violates Articles 18(2), 17(2), and 14(1) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, the Plaintiff argues that section 104(1)(b) of Act 29 is unconstitutional because it violates the rights to privacy, nondiscrimination, and individual liberties.

The section of Act 29 complained about reads;

104. Unnatural carnal knowledge

(1) A person who has unnatural carnal knowledge.

(b) of another person of not less than sixteen years of age with the consent of that other person commits a misdemeanor.

The plaintiff wants the Supreme Court to follow the lead set by Constitutional Courts in India, the Caribbean, and other States that have declared their laws prohibiting unnatural sexual relations to be unconstitutional.

Source: Ghanatodayonline.com