I have been pondering at the reasons for what the western media is calling "a sudden backtracking" by the government of Uganda on the Anti-homosexuality law recently. As far as I am concerned, the law is still law until it is scrapped or withdrawn for further review like the "miniskirt bill" recently, isn't it?
Obviously, pressure from western donors comes to mind when we look at the reasons for clarifying the "misunderstanding" as government put it. As western countries withdraw crucial support to Uganda's public service, particularly the health sector, government is the first to fill the pinch. Many civil servants' salaries depend directly from donations. Citizens generally might not feel any difference for services we haven't tangibly seen or felt in our pockets and stomachs. But at a more fundamental level, there is something going on behind the scenes that could be more worrying: The legal action taken against the Anti-homosexuality law. The court action that comprises amongst others, the prominent journalist/businessman Andrew Mwenda and the Presidential Advisor Fox Odoi. While many might think that the effort of this group is futile because the Anti-gay law seemingly has overwhelming public support in Uganda, we should be alert to the fact that cases in court take their own different course based on other parameters: The Constitution, Human Rights and the laws of the land. The judges will have to consider whether any citizen has the right to free choice of sexuality. In my view, those that have taken the matter to court are most likely to win. They have alot of international experience that they can tap into from precedences in the west where the matter of decriminalizing homosexuality has seen tough battles in court already. The result has been the flooring of Anti-homosexuality laws in court. With the inexperience of having ever dealt with such cases, I doubt that the Attorney General is equipped with any experimental capacity to win. On behalf of the people who dont want to see homosexuality become an open practice in this country, I would urge the govermment to be more visionary on this matter. Imagine what happens when the bill is defeated in court. It is almost guaranteed that the supporters of homosexuality will go for the jugular: Same-sex marriage rights. And they will do this under the same principles of human rights. Is our legal framework ready for this? Has the Attorney General advised government on the courses of action available and their chances of success. Government must be pragmatic and see beyond emotions and religious arguments. Judges can't rule on a matter based on the writings of the Coran or the teachings of the Gospel. They have to stick to what the laws written by parliament advise. These laws include the Constitution which already guarantees freedom of expression and human rights. The very ingredients that defeated criminalizing homosexuality in the west. The government of Uganda has now ushered in the era of long legal battles on homosexuality. The same that we have been passively hearing about taking place in the west. In the US, individual states accept same-sex marriage, only for another judge to cancel it by a stay of execution pending other cases, and then a federal judge would strike down the state judges decision, and now we have the federal state recognizing all same-sex marriages even when they aren't yet recognized at the local state level. So are we ready for that fight as well? Because that is the most likely course of events if the case against the anti-homosexuality law is defeated in court. In fact the defeat would be more immediate in our system where one court decides what is valid for the whole country. As it stands, the issue ahead after they fight the anti-homosexuality law, is same-sex marriage. And the country (politicians, legislators and civil society) needs to prepare for that without engaging in religious quotes because those wont count for the judges in court. Their are solutions and strategies that legal and political minds should already have in the safe. The problem with same sex marriage is that if we get to a stage where the courts force govermment to approve it under the principles of human rights, then we would be opening a pandora box for all sorts of madness and love fallacies to be approved and certified by the state. I just read a story where an Australian is celebrating her one year anniversary of marrying a french bridge (Daily Mail 11/7/2014 dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2688498/Rock-solid-The-Australian-woman-married-BRIDGE-celebrates-one-year-anniversary.html ). There was another story last year of a priest officiating at a marriage between an American woman and a roller coaster ( dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2507065/You-spin-right-round-Florida-woman-gets-married-ferris-wheel-named-Bruce-previous-relationships-airplane-train.html ). Obviously something is wrong in their legislation. Because how will the state handle matters of sharing property in the case of a divorce. What about when the human dies, or the bridge collapses. If their governments have approved these marriages then they find themselves wasting state time and resources dealing with psychotic rights. We have to take pre-emptive steps to avoid such eventualities, and we have to do it with laws. That is what vision is about, isn't it? Looking ahead and solving oncoming problems before they exist and bother us. In the meantime, putting forth long term strategies suitable to our communities on sexuality matters might become difficult for Ugandans since selected Honorable Members of Parliament and government officials have been slapped with travel bans and other sanctions. So our politicians might be afraid of dealing with anything "sexuality" at the moment. Well they shouldn't. Especially those already under sanctions. In fact, any new approach should serve as a means to see the lifting of these sanctions without backstabbing the people who overwhelmingly are against decriminalizing homosexuality. The new approach should also go as far as seeing the resumption of aid to the sectors where we are obviously unable to cope regardless of the chest thumping we are engaged in these days. My main concern is that many activists including myself would be willing to put clear suggestions for debate, but I am not sure government has a clever, decisive strategy moving forward at the moment. Hussein Juruga Lumumba Amin Former Media Consultant
_______________________________________________ WestNileNet mailing list WestNileNet@kym.net http://orion.kym.net/mailman/listinfo/westnilenet WestNileNet is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. _______________________________________________
