Some background

And so the Nigerian Senators having spent 46 of the first 100 days of this legislative term in recess resumed the active duty of promulgating serious legislation which last week included the Same Gender Marriage (Prohibition) Bill 2011.

The bill after much lively debate passed its second reading, but it behoves one to examine the purpose and intent of such a bill in Nigeria today.

It is quite evident that in much of Africa a swathe of fundamentalist religious fervour has swept through many countries endangering the lives of homosexuals. In Uganda, for the past few years, not only has the clamour to criminalise homosexuality rang out, the punishments to be meted out included the possibility of the death penalty.

Tolerated impunity in Africa

In January, a gay activist was bludgeoned to death by someone ready to plead gay-panic defence and his death cannot have been unrelated to the harshly virulent, bigoted and intolerant rhetoric of politicians and religious leaders alike who have with Machiavellian determination mined the mob element of the people to support the atrocious.

In South Africa with both homosexuality and same sex marriage legal, lesbians have been subjected to “corrective” rape, some have died in such attacks and I was completely repulsed beyond measure when a video was circulated of the public humiliation of a lesbian in West Africa with onlookers literally cheering on.

In other words, the concept of the acceptance of homosexuality in Africa will only be under duress from free societies in negotiations for other things than it becoming an accepted thing in society.

No danger of progressive thinking

Now, that is not to say that homosexuality does not exist in Africa, it has existed amongst humanity from time immemorial and for many in Africa it has not required the so-called influence of Western societies for it to be present and possibly thrive, no matter how little the numbers are.

That said, it will take a leap of faith bordering on the impossible to countenance a time when same sex marriage will gain any form acceptance where the law already prescribes punishments not far off from what would have made the Mosaic stoning acts almost merciful.

In the reports about the debate, as we have observed in other countries where homosexuality laws have been repealed, the legislators employed interestingly colourful language, all possibly based on conjuring the most revolting images to blackmail the unpersuaded to take sides for this attack on civil liberties.

Blackmail by revulsion

Taking root from religious law, they have conflated homosexuality with paedophilia, incest and bestiality which probably happens more amongst professed heterosexuals but it never finds mention. It would be nigh on impossible for such legislators to promulgate laws against adultery or fornication, though one is not suggesting that they have the propensity for such.

In the case of rape, when mention was made of the gang-rape and criminal assault of a lady, a member of the House of Representatives had the temerity to question the need for such discussion in the midst of other pressing Nigerian problems – it would have been wonderful for such minds to prevail on the fact that same sex marriage is not on the horizon for Nigeria in the foreseeable future and hence the debate was just an abject waste of time.

The bill was sponsored by 26 senators of which 3 were women, one of whom was once a Federal Minister of Finance; it invalidates unions and does not recognise any same sex marriages contracted in foreign countries where such is legal.

Witnesses criminalised more

What is quite amusing about the penalties is where the subjects of the “solemnisation” of the marriage are liable to 3 years of imprisonment whilst witnesses to such an event face either a term of 5 years imprisonment or a fine of NGN 2,000 or both.

In terms of groups, the fine is limited to NGN 50,000. What is confusing about what is patently a bad law is that it appears the same-sex marriage participants are not as severely punished as the witnesses to such an event – there are no two ways of stating that a bad law punishes observers more than the actors – it is radically and patently flawed whilst at the same time unfortunate that supposed learned legislators are blinded by moral fury so as to be oblivious of the miscarriage of justice that looms in the wake of this outrageously condemnable stance.

You have to ask if the stenographers or publishers of such laws for debate take time to review their copy, proofread the documents and ensure that ambiguity and incorrect spelling, context or content is accounted for.

In the section about the interpretation of the law, it suggests that “Same Gender Marriage” means the coming together of persons of the same sex with the purpose of leaving (sic) [I suppose living was intended here.] together as husband and wife or for other purposes of [a] same sexual (sic) [sex] relationship.

Unintended consequence already evident

However, let us not be given to unnecessary pedantry and look at the issues here; in the prevailing circumstances our Senators have just legislated for a mirage with the hope that they have handled an issue that hardly if even remotely touches any sense of reality – this bill shows an idleness of purpose with people so highly paid but lacking in principle, priority and focus to tackle more thorny issues that affect Nigeria and Nigerians at large.

Human-beings will always be human-beings and they will satisfy whatever feeling and persuasion they have regardless of the laws that encroach into the morality of society to attack an almost invisible minority.

The greater danger will be in the many who because of societal pressures will attempt to present public heterosexual lives whilst they pursue secret homosexual liaisons in what is commonly known as being on the Down-Low.

Societies that promulgate moral laws will always suffer from the almost schizophrenic tendency for people to live double lives, men or women with their families eventually getting caught up in literally unspeakable circumstances.

The wheels of social justice in reverse

The Same Gender Marriage (Prohibition) Bill is not one Nigeria needs at any time, it is legislating for the unforeseeable in anticipation of the improbable where there are no extenuating circumstances of evidence available to show that the country is vulnerable or prone to any such development.

Even in countries where Same Sex Marriage is legal, the homosexuals are not flocking to the altar in droves, it takes a lot to develop relationships between people regardless of gender-pairing and somehow our learned legislators in attempting to appear knowledgeable have just exposed they utter ignorance of a side of human nature they are completely clueless of – if we have such lack of expertise addressing even more pertinent legislative issues in Nigeria, we are the much poorer for it and we are sadder for the brigandage that allows for so much to be paid for such inconsequential and irrelevant service to Nigerians.

In the end, where we have allowed moral laws to trample on the rights of other who have committed in the eyes of this unjust law victimless crimes, the wheel of negative social justice reforms is never stationary, it continues to roll until to encroaches on other rights abrogated by reason of some moral law or code – we already see that our leadership have to compelled to speak up for victims of sexually violence, they probably will not readily condemn violence against others as a result of this bill as we inure ourselves from the plight of others.

Acknowledgements

The basic document of the Same Gender Marriage (Prohibition) Bill 2011 the news reports of the debating the bill appeared on ThisDayLive and The Nation newspapers.

_________________________________

We the undersigned condemn in the strongest possible terms the murder of Mr David Kato the Ugandan gay rights campaigner. We wish to state emphatically that homosexuality is neither a sin nor a social or cultural construct. It is a biological given. Homosexuals are human beings like everybody else.  Scientific research has been helpful in clearing the fog of ignorance entrenched by some religious texts in regards to homosexuality. Our opinions of homosexuality must change for the better just as our opinion of slavery has changed even though it was endorsed by those same religious texts. All violence against gays and people deemed to be gay in Africa must cease forthwith.

We call on the government of Uganda to find and prosecute all those involved in the murder of Mr Kato, including the newspaper that called for the hanging of gays. We also call on African governments to learn from the South African example by expunging from their laws all provisions that criminalize homosexuality or treat homosexuals as unworthy of the same rights and entitlements as other citizens.  African states must protect the rights of their citizens to freedom and dignity. Homosexuals must not be denied these rights.

Undersigned

1. Wale Adebanwi, PhD, University of California, US

2. Diran Adebayo, Writer,  UK

3. Kayode Adeduntan, PhD, University of Ibadan, Nigeria

4. Biola Adegboyega, University of Calgary, Canada

5. Shola Adenekan, Editor, The New Black Magazine, UK

6. Pius Adesanmi, PhD, Carleton University, Canada

7. Akin Adesokan, PhD, Indiana University, US

8. Joe Agbro, Journalist, Nigeria

9. Anthony Akinola, PhD, Oxford, UK

10. Anengiyefa Alagoa, Writer, UK

11. Ellah Allfrey, Deputy Editor, Granta Magazine, UK

12. Alnoor Amlani, Writer, Kenya

13. Ike Anya, Public health doctor and writer, UK

14. Bode Asiyanbi, Writer, Lancaster University, UK

15. Sefi Atta, Writer, US

16. Lizzy Attree, PhD, University of East London, UK

17. Damola Awoyokun, Writer, UK

18. Doreen Baingana, Writer, Uganda

19. Igoni Barrett, Writer, Nigeria

20. Tom Burke, Bard College, US

21. Jude Dibia, Writer, Nigeria

22. Chris Dunton, PhD, National University of Lesotho, Lesotho

23. Ropo Ewenla, PhD, Obafemi Awolowo University, Nigeria

24. Chielozona Eze, PhD, Northeastern Illinois University, US

25. Aminatta Forna, Writer, UK

26. Ivor Hartmann, Writer, South Africa

27. Chris Ihidero, Writer, Lagos State University, Nigeria

28. Ikhide R. Ikheloa, Writer, US

29. Sean Jacobs, PhD, New School, US

30. Biodun Jeyifo, PhD, Harvard University, US

31. Brian Jones, Professor Emeritus, Zimbabwe

32. Martin Kiman, Writer, US

33. Lauri Kubuitsile, Writer, Botswana

34. Zakes Mda, PhD, Ohio University, US

35. Colin Meier, Writer, South Africa

36. Gayatri Menon, PhD, Franklin and Marshall College, US

37. Valentina A. Mmaka,  Writer, Italy/South Africa

38. Jane Morris, Publisher, Zimbabwe

39. Mbonisi P. Ncube, Writer, South Africa

40. Iheoma Nwachukwu, Writer, Nigeria

41. Onyeka Nwelue, Writer and filmmaker, India/Nigeria

42. Nnedi Okorafor, PhD, Writer, Chicago State University, US

43. Ebenezer Obadare, PhD, University of Kansas, US

44. Juliane Okot Bitek, Writer, Canada

45. Tejumola Olaniyan, PhD, University of Wisconsin, US

46. Ngozichi Omekara, Trinidad and Tobago

47. Akin Omotosho, Actor and filmmaker, South Africa

48. Kole Omotosho, PhD, Africa Diaspora Research Group, South Africa

49. Samuel Sabo, Writer, UK

50. Ramzi Salti, PhD, Stanford University, US

51. Brett L. Shadle, PhD, Virginia Tech, US

52. Lola Shoneyin, Writer, Nigeria

53. Wole Soyinka, Nobel Laureate for Literature

54. Olufemi Taiwo, PhD, Seattle University, US

55. Kola Tubosun, Writer, Fulbright Scholar, United States

56. Uzor Maxim Uzoatu, Writer, Nigeria

57. Abdourahman A.Waberi, Writer, US /Djibouti

58. Binyavanga Wainaina, Writer, Kenya

59. Ronald Elly Wanda, Writer& Lecturer, Marcus Garvey Pan-Afrikan Institute, Uganda

60. Kristy Warren, PhD, University of Warwick, UK

One of the those presenting the Petition, Kasha Jacqueline of FARUGANDA was shocked by the response of the Speaker who is supposed to be independent.

“[The] Speaker of Parliament insists that the Bill shall not be withdrawn,”We might reduce the punishments, but it cannot be go out the way it is, it has to go through procedures and also the MP who tabled it is the only one who can withdraw it” he said . So guessing that they are insisting on just “softening” it. I cannot believe this.”

By stating the Bill shall not be withdrawn, the Speaker, who is supposed to be independent and not give opinions, is clearly showing his support for the Bill. The Bill will now go back to Parliament for a second reading and then on to the Legal and Parliamentary Committee where there will be an open discussion with the public which will include lawyers acting for the activists and civil society organisations. This will be a further opportunity to challenge the legality of the proposed Bill and to put further pressure on Parliament to abandon it altogether. It will then return to Parliament for a third and final reading and a vote.

There are signs of withdrawal of at least some aspects of the Bill, particularly the death penalty, though even if that is dropped the Bill in any form is still a violation of all national, continental and international Human Rights treaties and legislation to which Uganda is a signatory.

I think the speaker and the government have put themselves into a corner now and they are panicking. They thought it would be a political game in their favor but it turns out now they are between a rock and sand. They have to amuse the voters and at the same time they need funds to run the country. Now they must be thinking what a blunder they made, that’s why even Bahati and Ssempa are silent…… Kasha Jacqueline

However the voices of hate are still being heard in old and new places such as this comment by in the Ugandan Observer

I personally feel gays or homos have a mental problem. I’ve even failed to imagine how they do their thing. I often pray that this debate should come to an end because the more we talk about it the more silly arguments in favour of it will always be raised by the Mwendas and Nagendas of this world as our children are listening.

Human rights activists like the (Dr. Sylvia) Tamales should know that rights are a creation of man and you cannot have rights where there is no life, a [situational] trend the gays are heading to…….
But when all is said and done, [I submit that] gays should suffer death not only by hanging but also by stoning at a public marketplace. The alternative for them is to seek medical attention; a mad person cannot claim the right to be mad. I will end by saying: Bravo Bahati, bravo Dr. Buturo!

At particular risk if the Bill is passed, in any form, are the frontline defenders like Kasha, Frank Mugisha of SMUG and Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo who has long been a ray of hope and light in the Ugandan church. [The Bishop took part in the Sexuality and Social Justice Portrait and Testimonies project at the 2007 WSF - listen here] Last week a ground-breaking exhibition, Proudly African & Transgender, by South African artist and activist for social justice, opened at Amnesty International in Amsterdam [See here for portraits and testimonies]. The exhibition is extremely pertinent to the Bill as three of the Transgender activists – Victor Mukasa, Salango and Nikki Mawanda and Julius who identifies as Transgender and Intersex, are also Ugandans who are highly visible and have consistently put their lives on the line. The fact that transgender people are targeted to the same degree as gay and lesbians in this Bill means they too would be amongst the first to be arrested by the government. Victor Mukasa highlights the point that transgender people are what society perceives as the obvious homosexual even if they do not identify that way simply because they are visible and clearly transgressing with gender.

My experience as a transgender person in Uganda is not a sweet story. In short, a transgender person in Uganda is constantly surrounded with ridicule, mockery and abuse. For most Ugandans, any person that expresses “him/herself” as the opposite sex is a homosexual and so this exposes transgender people to all the mistreatment that they would love to give to a homosexual. All transgender people are seen as the obvious homosexuals. Therefore, on top of all the transphobia, there is homophobia even if you are not gay. For the case of Uganda, you can imagine the level.

The implications of the Bill and the denial that MSM (men who have sex with men) exist in Uganda are also preventing access to HIV/AIDs information and treatment. NGOs who support LGBTI groups and HIV/AIDS organisations are also at risk from losing their NGO status within the country because of the association of HIV/AIDS with gay men. People live in fear of being identified as being gay so they do not want to be tested or be seen to be attending clinics and groups which provide support. The bill is creating an environment of fear and hostility in Uganda which ultimately will permeate the lives of everyone. The government and religious institutions are playing a game of political Russian roulette by presenting the Bill as being directed at LGBTI people and driving a campaign of hate. At some point soon, I hope Ugandans will wake up to the fact that that a Bill which refuses the human rights of LGBTI people ultimately rejects the rights of all Ugandans whatever the gender identity, sexuality or sexual preference.

Sign the petition to oppose Uganda’s anti-gay law.

Petition the Prime Minister to pressure the Malawian government to free Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga who have been imprisoned for a same sex marriage – Sign the petition here.

I’m writing this post in response to number of articles on the prevalence of homophobia in Africa and to try and give some perspective and historical context.     In the last six months we have seen the expression of homophobia with the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill; the arrest of gay Malawian couple, Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza, for getting married;  most recently the appointment of homophobic journalist,  Jon Qwelane as South Africa’s ambassador to Uganda.   All of these are well documented so I’m not going to go into detail.   What I think is important, particularly with regards to the Ugandan Bill and the homophobic campaign that preceded it, is that it has been successfully internationalised by LGBTI activists on the continent, many who have put their lives at risk in letting us know what is happening.  [For the best in depth and regularly updated commentary and analysis on Uganda, see Gay Ugandan].  The international response has been impressive,  though as this report shows not wholly reliable. Religious leaders, government ministers, international human rights organisations and bloggers condemning the Bill.  The disgust around the Bill, has to some extent forced Ugandan President Museveni to retract the worst aspects of the Bill – the death penalty.  However I wouldn’t trust him as far as I could throw a piece of paper and the pressure to drop the Bill completely will need to be maintained.   Fro example the  “million person Anti-Gay march” is  still planning to go ahead in Kampala next month.

Uganda’s National Pastors Task Force Against Homosexuality*, chaired by Ssempa has resolved to support the Bill with amendments that include reduction of the sentence from death penalty to 20 years for aggravated homosexuality and the inclusion of a provision of “counseling and rehabilitation  [by the church] to persons experiencing homosexual temptations.”

Ssempa maintains that homosexuality is illegal, breaks the laws of God and that it breaks the laws of nature which stipulate that a male goes with a female. According to him it is a Taboo for same-sex people to be in relationship and he basis his assertion on African culture, tradition and Religion.

The Ugandan Bill has also exposed the working relationship between some Christian fundamentalist churches in the US, in particular the organisation known as “The Family,” and religious leaders in Uganda.   The ideology behind the  “The Family” appears to be about power and influence as well as religion – and the poor will not be the ones to  inherit the earth if they have anything to do with it.

The case of the gay Malawian couple  gives us an idea of what will happen if the  Ugandan Bill is passed only it would be worse, much worse.  They have been denied bail and if found guilty could  face up to 14 years in prison.    On Friday I spoke with Cameroonian LGBTI activit, Joel Gana of “African Men for Sexual Health & Rights,  who along with Victor Mukasa of SMUG and  IGLHRC are in Malawi to give personal and strategic support to Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza.   In addition there are a number of other human rights defenders who have been arrested or whom are wanted by the police.

Although there is no doubt a long struggle ahead for the couple we were both reminded of the case of the Cameroonian nine who were arrested on 21st May 2005 on charges of sodomy.  After a 12 month campaign by human rights defenders / LGBTI activists across the continent the men were released and acquitted without charge.  The case of the Cameroon nine went along way to solidify the movement as Joel pointed out.

The case in the Cameroon helped solidify the movement and this could happen here.  The movement is not out but it could do the same.  Because you know the organisation in Cameroon came out of that movement to fight for the rights and thats how the “Alternative Cameroon” was founded and why they are so strong now.

There have been other victories over the past five years.   The two Nigerian Bills – the Same Sex Marriage Bill and the The Same Gender Prohibition Bill have both been shelved despite the backing of both bills by religious leaders such as the Nigerian Anglican Primate, Bishop Peter Akinola.   This is not to say they will not rise again especially if the Ugandan Bill gets passed but preventing both of them from being passed was a victory for Nigerian and international human rights activists.    In December 2008, after three and half years, Ugandan activist, Victor Mukasa won his case against the Ugandan attorney general

From the momentum created by the Ugandan LGBTI Human Rights Court Case, the numbers of people involved in advocating for the protection of the basic human rights of LGBTI people have continued to grow in Uganda. Although the 30-day “Let Us Live In Peace” Ugandan LGBTI Human Rights Media Campaign led by Sexual Minorities Uganda in August and September 2007 was met with great controversy and hostility, greater awareness and understanding of the need for protection of the basic human rights of kuchus was built among large segments of the general population in Uganda. Publicity around one of the key aspects of the case, inhuman treatment and discrimination based on gender identity, has helped to foster openness and courage in many transgender individuals in Uganda.

In September 2009, Eudy Simelane finally received a measure of justice after her murderer and rapist was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.   However, two other men involved in the crime were acquitted on the basis they were there but did nothing,  a judicial position which campaigners will be working towards changing.  The campaign around Eudy’s trial was not an easy one and was fought with very little resources despite the international media interest in the crime and trial.

It’s a relief for everyone – family and friends of Eudy to have finally received justice. The campaign around Eudy’s case has been central to raising awarness of hate crimes against lesbians in South Africa and for that we must acknowledge the work of The Lesbian and Gay Equality Project and it’s director, Phumi Mtetwa who worked tirelessly to make sure the case was given the highest possible profile. Recognition must also go to all the friends and supporters who attended the court hearings despite the lack of funds to transport and accommodate them during the endless postponements and delays.

Most recently in Decemeber last year,  the Rwandan government changed it’s mind on the proposed Anti-Homosexuality Bill with the Minister for Justice following pressure from African and International LGBT organisations declaring.

“The government I serve and speak for on certain issues cannot and will not in any way criminalize homosexuality; sexual orientation is a private matter and each individual has his or her own orientation – – this is not a State matter at all,” said Karugarama.

The Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill remains in place.  it will set a dangerous precedent across the continent if it gets passed on any level let alone with the death penalty.   It could influence and encourage those behind the Nigerian Bill as well as the governments in Gambia, Senegal, Malawi, Kenya and Zambia which have all taken a draconian stance towards same sex relationships in their countries.   What I wanted to do in this post, was to also return  to and  emphasise some of the victories African LGBT activists have achieved over the years – sometimes on their own with very little resources, sometimes with the help of international human rights organisations.
Links:

Boycott the 2010 World Cup

Open Letter to President Zuma

Statement by Equality Project

Statement on Gender & Sexuality – South Africa

Many among us in Nigeria accept that gays deserve punishment or at least live sinful lives. Others would take the extra step and say that people who are known to be gay do not deserve the same consideration, the same rights, as those among us who are not. This bill comes from the latter view, and this thinking has been allowed hegemonic prevalence. It has been maddening to read report after report on the issue and hear people talk about it without pointing out the most basic problem, which is that this bill refuses to acknowledge the very humanity of gays and that it threatens their human rights.

Curious about the bill’s intentions, I read the memorandum (it’s linked above, with the rest of the bill) where the member of Ugandan parliament Hon. David Bahati explained why he was putting this bill forward. The meat of it:

“The Bill aims at strengthening the nation’s capacity to deal with emerging internal and external threats to the traditional heterosexual family.

This legislation further recognize the fact that same sex attraction is not an innate and immutable characteristic.

This bill further aims at providing a comprehensive and enhanced legislation to protect the cherished culture of the people of Uganda against the attempts of sexual rights activists seeking to impose their values of sexual promiscuity on the people of Uganda.

There is also need to protect the children and youths of Uganda who are made vulnerable to sexual abuse and deviation as a result of cultural changes, uncensored information technologies, parentless child developmental setting increasing attempts by homosexuals to raise children in homosexual relationships through adoption, foster care, or otherwise.”

What one notices is the repeated attempts to ‘otherize’ gay people. If gayness is “not an innate and immutable characteristic”, but is one that presents an existential threat to the “traditional family” and the “cherished children of Uganda”, then it stands to reason that gayness must come from an exogenous source. Surely, these “uncensored information technologies” (i.e. porn) is a creation of people– yes, people– and it surely had to have crossed someone’s mind for it to gain such audience! If people, and from anywhere who are not any less people as the average Ugandan, are not the source of this homosexuality, then what? A pill? A food? Who created it? How do we know where “the gay” comes from? If we do know and we choose to take homosexuality as illness, then that is a different matter. But no, homosexuality here is presented as a faceless evil that haunts flesh. If you say that children and families need to protected from the gays, you are then implying that the threat does not come from within, but from without. These gay forces lurk somewhere beyond the realm of society, waiting for one to stray outside the pack before they pounce into innocent bodies that they may dwell and infest and become legion. The gays are Lazarus, and since there is no Jesus among us who has been successful at casting out this most cursed legion from innocent bodies, then perhaps it would be best to just discard of these bodies that host this evil in its entirety, with the State doing the honors, acting as our prophet. In this belief lies the link to the brand of Christianity espoused by many among the population of many an African nation. We have somehow planted the seed of this kind of illogical thinking everywhere, and it’s troubling.

Also troubling is that if you have to protect “the cherish culture of the people of Uganda” from homosexuality, then you are implying that Ugandans can’t be gay, which– not to be glib, but still– means that this bill is unnecessary for Ugandans. For if these people cannot be both Ugandan and gay, then why the need to create a bill that prohibits something that does not already exist?

Law, after all, works with the help of precedent to ensure that best practices are put in place for all known circumstances. We have laws that deal with criminal acts like murder, but we do not have any immigration laws that deal with extraterrestrial aliens coming into our countries, for example, because that has not happen before, nor do we expect that ever to happen. But can what is being said here be much darker? Are they insinuating that gays are not citizens? If one takes takes this line of thinking to term, and in as young a country as all African countries are, this can set a bad precedent for human rights within the population and for whichever minority a government may choose to disenfranchise next.

I will not argue as to whether or not being gay is a sin– beliefs by their very nature are not to be reasoned out because they cannot be proved– but I will argue that gays are human beings. Another hidden theme here is that when we human beings commit human sins there need not be a call for our death. But homosexuality is so egregious because it belies our humanity. Humans don’t act that way. If they were considered fully human and their sins on par with other human sins, then two consenting adults having sex– not one raping the other, not one imposing him/herself on someone who does not have the power to consent, not one having sex with animals who do not communicate as we do and therefore cannot consent– might raise an eyebrow, but not a call for their heads.