Ghana’s parliament has passed a controversial bill that criminalises LGBTQ+ identity and advocacy, sending shockwaves through the Commonwealth and drawing a sharp response from the UK. The bill, which imposes prison sentences of up to three years for identifying as LGBTQ+ and up to five years for promoting LGBTQ+ rights, was passed amid a crackdown on queer communities across Africa.
The UK government has urged Commonwealth partners to uphold human rights, with a Foreign Office spokesperson stating: “We are deeply concerned by this legislation. It undermines the fundamental freedoms and dignity of LGBTQ+ people in Ghana.” The UK has previously threatened to review aid and trade ties with nations that pass such laws, but critics say diplomatic pressure has been inconsistent.
For Ghanaians, the bill’s passage is a devastating blow. Activists report a surge in arrests and threats since the bill was introduced. “This is not about morality. It is about power and control,” said Nana Ama, a human rights lawyer in Accra. “The law will be used to silence dissent and target vulnerable people.”
The bill now awaits the president’s signature to become law. President Nana Akufo-Addo has signalled he will sign it, despite international outcry.
The UK’s response has reignited debate about its role in the Commonwealth. Some argue the government should impose sanctions, while others note that the UK has its own record of anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination until relatively recently. For working people in Ghana, the bill risks deepening poverty. LGBTQ+ Ghanaians already face discrimination in housing, employment and healthcare. Criminalisation will push them further into the shadows, making it harder to access jobs and support.
“This is a disaster for the real economy,” said Kofi Mensah, a trade unionist in Kumasi. “When you criminalise a group of people, you force them into informal work, lower wages, and unsafe conditions. That hurts everyone.”
The UK must now decide whether to back its words with action. For Commonwealth nations like Ghana, the choice is between human rights and political convenience. For now, the bill’s passage shows which side is winning.
