A group known as the United Movement for Development (UMD) has petitioned President John Mahama to remove Prof. H. Kwasi Prempeh as Chairman of the Constitutional Review Committee.
According to the group, their call stems from Prof. H. Kwasi Prempeh’s advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights in Ghana, which they claim disregards and disrespects Ghanaian culture and values.
President Mahama, on January 19, 2025, appointed Prof. H. Kwasi Prempeh to chair the committee, which is composed of distinguished experts and professionals tasked with reviewing Ghana’s 1992 Constitution and recommending amendments to enhance democratic governance.
However, the UMD believes the academic is not suitable for the role, arguing that he has not demonstrated a steadfast commitment to upholding the moral, cultural, and ethical values that reflect the aspirations of the Ghanaian people, citing his advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights.
“Our primary concern lies in Prof. Prempeh’s well-documented advocacy for LGBTQ+ ‘rights’ in Ghana, which is inconsistent with the norms, beliefs, cultural, and moral values cherished by Ghanaians. Furthermore, the broader implications of the LGBTQ+ movement on societal stability, individual well-being, and cultural norms demand urgent attention,” the group said in a statement.
The UMD further claimed that there is no single human right or freedom enjoyed by the majority of Ghanaians that LGBTQ+ practitioners and advocates are denied. Instead, they allege that what LGBTQ+ advocates seek are “special privileges cleverly disguised as LGBTQ+ ‘rights.'”
According to the group, these so-called “rights” come with significant challenges: they allegedly infringe on the rights of the larger population, impose financial burdens on the state, and undermine the cultural and moral values that hold society together.
The statement maintained that Prof. Prempeh’s track record demonstrates a lack of integrity and a profound disconnect from the values and aspirations of the majority of Ghanaians, making him unqualified to propose laws governing the nation.
“Prof. Kwasi Prempeh is nothing less than a champion and idol for LGBTQ+ practitioners. Elevating him by appointing him to chair the Constitutional Review Committee and propose amendments for over 33 million Ghanaians who oppose his ideology would be an endorsement of his unacceptable agenda. It is unfair to the majority of us. It would embolden LGBTQ+ activists to intensify their assault on the sacred norms, traditions, and values of Ghana, plunging the nation into further moral and cultural decay. It will cast a huge dent on the image of Ghana internationally, especially when, in 2025, even the American government, through executive orders, limited the activities of the LGBTQ+ movement,” the statement added.
The group is calling on the President to replace Prof. H. Kwasi Prempeh with retired Supreme Court Judge, Justice William Atuguba.
“Appoint Justice William Atuguba as Chairman of the Committee. Justice Atuguba’s distinguished 22-year tenure on the Supreme Court reflects his deep expertise in constitutional law, his unwavering commitment to the rule of law, and his alignment with the cultural and moral values cherished by Ghanaians. His widely respected integrity and understanding of the nation’s constitutional framework make him an ideal candidate to lead this significant review process,” the statement concluded.
Read below the full statement:
27th lanuary, 2025
United Movement for Development (UMD) FMB MD 224,Madma Accra 0103972035
H.E. PRESIDENT JOHN DRAMANI MAHAMA THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FLAGSTAFF HOUSE ACCRA
Dear Your Excellency
Attn: Media The General public
PETITION: REMOVAL OF PROF. KWASI PREMPEH AS CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR ADVOCATING LGBTQ+ IN GHANA, DISREGARDING AND DISRESPECTING OUR CULTURE AND VALUES AS GHANAIANS.
Respectfully, the United Movement for Development (UMD) is a coalition of Ghanaian citizens and associations committed to promoting inclusive and accountable governance for sustainable development.
We wish to extend our heartfelt congratulations on your remarkable victory in the elections. We take this bold step to write to you on this critical matter, confident in your unwavering dedication to listening to and addressing the concerns of all Ghanaians, irrespective of their status.
We commend your commitment to fulfilling your promise to review the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. This pivotal initiative reflects a dedication to addressing constitutional limitations, fostering inclusive governance, enhancing access to justice, and preserving and promoting the cultural and moral values that embody the aspirations of the Ghanaian people.
It is our belief that those nominated to serve on the Committee tasked with reviewing the Constitution should be individuals of the highest reputation and credibility. They must have distinguished themselves through their contributions and demonstrated a steadfast commitment to upholding the moral, cultural, and ethical values that reflect the aspirations of the Ghanaian people.
These individuals should have earned the trust and respect of the broader public, ensuring they are entrusted with the responsibility of proposing laws that will govern the lives of citizens and further their aspirations.
In this regard. Your Excellency, we commend your selection of the committee members. recognizing the care taken in choosing those who will contribute meaningfully to this important task.
However, we respectfully express concerns about the inclusion of PROF. KWASI PREMPEH, whose public conduct, in our view, may not fully align with the esteemed qualities expected of such a distinguished role. PROF. KWASI PREMPEH boasts an impressive academic background, having earned credentials from prestigious Western institutions, which have undoubtedly shaped his perspectives, influenced by Western culture and values.
A significant aspect of his commentary on the 1992 Constitution of Ghana revolves around the contentious issue of “winner-take-all” politics. This topic, often debated by those who view political appointments and governance as opportunities for personal gain and rewards, is seen by many as rooted in selfishness and corruption.
Prof. Prempeh’s stance appears to suggest that political opponents should also “benefit” from that, a viewpoint that raises concerns about its implications for the general welfare of Ghanaians.
While this debate is itself troubling, our primary concern lies in Prof. Prempeh’s well-documented advocacy for LGDTQ+ “rights” in Ghana which is inconsistent with the norms, beliefs, cultural and moral values cherished by Ghanaians. Furthermore, the broader implications of the LGESTQ+ movement on societal stability, individual well-being, and cultural norms demand urgent attention.
There is no single human right or freedom enjoyed by the majority of Ghanaians that LGBTQ+ practitioners and advocates are denied. What they seek are special privileges, cleverly disguised as LGBTQ+ “rights.” These so-called “rights” come with three major challenges: they infringe on the rights of the larger population, impose significant financial burdens on the state, and undermine the cultural and moral values that hold society together.
We expect Prof. Kwasi Prempeh, as a learned scholar, to understand the distinction between universal human rights and unwarranted privileges that seek to prioritize the interests of a minority at the expense of the majority. The rights he so passionately advocates for arc not about equality but about dominance under the guise of inclusivity. Some of these so-called IGHTQ+ “rights” (special privileges) include; Access to Women-Only Spaces: Biological males identifying as transgender women (men in skirts and wigs) demand unrestricted access to private spaces traditionally reserved for women, such as washrooms and changing rooms. This violates the safety and privacy rights of biological women.
Example: A boy claims to identify as a girl and demands admission to Wesley Girls’ High School, insisting on bathing in the same shared bathrooms as the girls. Are we seriously expected to push his so-called “rights” above the privacy and dignity of every girl in that school, all in the name of “minority rights”? This is not progress: it’s insanity. These individuals don’t need validation or glorification—they need mental health intervention. Pandering to such delusions undermines common sense, erodes boundaries, and puts the majority at risk for the sake of appeasing a loud minority.
Participation In Women’s Sports: Transgender women (biological males) demand the right to compete in women’s sports. This leads to unfair competition, as physical advantages create an uneven playing field, marginalizing female athletes and threatening the integrity of women’s spans competitions. Hospital and Clinic Accommodations: Some biological males (Pedophiles) identifying as young girls despite being over 50 years old demand access to hospital and clinic wards designated for female children, violating the safety and privacy of young girls.
Religious Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages: LGBTQ+ activists demand that same-sex marriages be blessed by religious institutions such as churches and mosques, even when such unions are considered sinful according to the Bible and Quran.
This as an infringement on religious freedom. Also, while they ague that everyone sins, most people do not demand their sins be blessed, validated, or glorified in places of worship. Specialized Prison Facilities: Gay, lesbian, Queer, Bisexual, Pansexual, Intersex, Asexual, Nonbinary and Transgender individuals demand special prison facilities, arguing they cannot safely be placed among biological males or females prisoners.
Governments face additional costs to establish and maintain such special facilities. LGBTQ+ Education in Schools: LGBTQ+ advocates demand that their lifestyles and identities be included in school curriculums, particularly at the elementary level. This is an effort to indoctrinate children at an impressionable age, with a focus on normalizing LGBTQ+ practices.
Transgender Transition for Young Children: Children as young as five years old, who are not even legally old enough to drink alcohol, be initiated into the transgender transition process if they display slight behaviors associated with the opposite sex. This sometimes occur without parental consent and, in some cases, against the will of the parents.
Researches and societal observations reveal alarming consequences associated with the promotion of LGBTQ+ “rights”: Mental health concerns: Studies, including early research by psychologists, have historically classified LGBTQ+ behaviours as psychological disorders, raising questions about the broader implications of normalizing these practices.
Reports from various health studies reveal higher rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal tendencies among LGBTQ+ individuals. For instance, transgender individuals, often referred to as “trans kids.” face disproportionate levels of mental distress, with many later expressing regret over irreversible medical procedures undertaken at a young age. Cultural and social disruption: In societies where LGBTQ+ advocacy has gained ground, there have been instances of policies and laws being enforced at the expense of traditional cultural norms.
For example, parents who oppose exposing their children to LGBTQ—ideologies in schools have been silenced, fined, or ostracized. These instances highlight how the movement often disregards the beliefs and rights of the majority in pursuit of its agenda.
Victimization and coercion: Numerous reports have surfaced globally of individuals being forced to conform to LGRTQ+ narratives under threat of societal or legal penalties. For example. business owners have faced lawsuits and reputational harm for declining to participate in LGBTQ+-themed events or services due to their religious beliefs. Such cases demonstrate the coercive nature of the movement and its disregard for the freedoms and rights of others.
While Prof. Kwasl Prempeh argues we don’t need a legislation : Legislation to ban LGBTQ+ advocacy in Ghana is essential to protect the nation’s cultural identity, moral values, and societal cohesion. Just as laws against incest, stealing, and marijuana abuse exist to uphold societal norms and protect citizens from harm, legislation against LGBTQ+ advocacy would ensure the preservation of Ghana’s deeply rooted moral and cultural heritage, which over 95% of Ghanaians cherish. Without explicit laws, legal ambiguity could allow advocates to exploit gaps in the system to promote activities that undermine societal values. Legislation not only reflects national principles but also adds to the moral education taught in schools. reinforcing societal values among younger generations and equipping citizens to resist harmful practices.
Additionally, the legislation protect offenders from public mob justice by ensuring that justice is administered through due legal process. preventing lawlessness and ensuring fairness. Legislation acts as a deterrent, shields the country from external influences, empowers authorities to take decisive action and projects the collective will of the people. ensuring Ghana’s moral and cultural integrity remains intact.
While Prof. Kwasi Prempeh argues for freedom of speech and the media: The notion that legislation Conning LGBTQ+ advocacy will take away freedom of speech and freedom of the media is unfounded, as freedoms are not absolute and are subject to limitations that protect public order, morality. and national security. Just as it is illegal to use the media to promote or advocate for practices like incest, prostitution, or marijuana use, activities deemed harmful to society, restricting LGBTQ+ advocacy in the media serves a similar purpose.
These restrictions are not an infringement on freedoms but a necessary measure to preserve the moral fabric, cultural values, and societal cohesion of Ghana. Freedom of speech and media comes with responsibility, and no society permits absolute freedom where it undermines the collective good. Legislation will not suppress speech but will set clear boundaries to ensure that media platforms do not become tools for promoting activities that threaten societal norm and values.
By providing such regulations, Ghana reinforces its commitment to protecting its cultural integrity while maintaining a responsible and constructive media landscape. For aggressively promoting and advocating for these dangerous and immoral LGBTQ+ agenda in Ghana. with blatant disregard for the moral, cultural, and religious beliefs of over 95% of the population. Prof. Kwasi Prempeh holds a MINORITY dangerous views and is unfit to chair this important committee.
His track record demonstrates a lack of integrity and a profound disconnect from the values and aspirations of the majority of Ghanaians, making him wholly unqualified to propose laws that govern our lives.
Prof. Kwasi Prempch is nothing less than a champion and idol for LGBTQ+ practitioners. Elevation by appointing him to chair the Constitutional Review Committee and propose amendment for over 33 million Ghanaians who oppose his ideology would be an endorsement of his unacceptable agenda. It is unfair to the majority of us. It would embolden LGBTQ+ activists to intensify their assault on the sacred norms, traditions, and values of Ghana, plunging the nation into further moral and cultural decay. It will cast a huge dent on the image of Ghana internationally, especially when in this 2025,even the American government, just through executive orders limited the activities of the LGBTQ+.
We respectfully petition Your Excellency to:
I. Remove PROF. KWESI PREMPEH as Chairman and member of the Constitutional Review Committee.
Appoint JUSTICE WILLIAM ATUGUBA as Chairman of the Committee. Justice Atuguba’s distinguished 22-year tenure on the Supreme Court reflects his deep expertise in constitutional law, his unwavering commitment to the rule of law, and his alignment with the cultural and moral values cherished by Ghanaians. His widely respected integrity and understanding of the nation’s constitutional framework make him an ideal candidate to lead this significant review process.
Your Excellency, we have unwavering confidence in your dedication to upholding the s sovereignty, cultural heritage, and moral integrity of Ghana. We are certain that you will act decisively to ensure that the leadership of this important committee reflects the trust and aspirations of the Ghanaian people. Thank you for your attention and continued exemplary leadership.
Yours Faithfully, ABRAHAM KLUTSEY The Convenor for UMD Human rights advocate abaham.klutse@yahoo com
Cc: Hon Alban Bagbin (The Speaker of Parliament Of Ghana) King Tackle Teiko Tsuru II, (The Ga-Manse) The National Chief Imam, Majority Leader, Minority Leader, The President of the National House of Chiefs, The Christian Council, The Catholic Bishop Conference, Moses Foh-Amoaning Esq, Hon Sam George, The Ghana Pentecostal And Charismatic Council, The National Coalition For Proper Human Sexual Rights And Family Values Catholic Bishops, Trade Union Congress (TUC) Ghana National Association of Teachers (GNAT) Ghana Medical Association (GMA)
KA
You can also watch the latest episode of Everyday People on GhanaWeb TV below:
