By Karabo Mjiyako
Image by Reatlaretse Menoe
The rights of queer people remain a contested issue in many parts of the world, and
Africa is no exception. Many conversations in Africa dismiss homosexuality as an
‘un-African’ characteristic that was brought into the continent by colonial powers.
Queer, in the context of this article, will be used as an overarching term that is
inclusive of all the identities represented in the LGBTQ+ community.
The term 'un-African' is frequently employed as a means of suppressing various
gender and sexual identities. It has also served as a justification for, at times, harsh
punitive measures intended to rectify what African citizens, religious groups, and, in
some instances, heads of state have labeled as 'a threat to genuine African identity.
“You can only insist that homosexuality is ’un-African’ if you
maintain that a few individuals are entitled to define what being
African must be and mean”-Eusebius Mckaiser
This is in contrast to anthropological research that has demonstrated the historical
presence of homosexuality within African culture. It is indeed surprising that as we
entered the twentieth century and observed contemporary African politics,
homosexuality became increasingly viewed as contradictory to African culture. It's
worth noting that homosexuality remains prohibited in over 30 of Africa's 54
countries.
In response to the idea that homosexuality is considered 'un-African',
award-winning activist Ndiilo Nthengwe stated, "For far too long, Africans have propagated the narrative that homosexuality is 'un-African' as a means to criminalize consensual adult relationships. This highlights a prevalent groupthink mentality in Africa, echoing clichéd notions about gender and sexual identity. What is genuinely 'un-
African' are the colonial penal codes we inherited, which criminalize our diverse
sexual and gender identities.
These views directly contrast with those of Ugandan President, Y oweri Museveni,
and former Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, both of whom have publicly
advocated for the eradication of homosexuality and queer identities within Africancommunities. This raises an important question: What does it reveal about African societies when Heads of State openly endorse harmful homophobia through actions that explicitly and implicitly restrict the spaces available for queer individuals to fully express themselves? What about their human rights?
"It is absolutely imperative that every human being’s freedom and
human rights are respected, all over the world."– Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir
The harmful impact of the dissemination of hateful narratives concerning the
LGBTQ+ community can be analyzed in the South African context, where there is a
significant disparity between the highly progressive clause on sexual orientation
within the country's Bill of Rights and the attitudes held by its citizens toward queer
individuals. The attitudes of citizens and the continent at large are still reflective of a
society that is rife with homophobia and transphobia, which continue to coalesce to
repress queer-identifying individuals in life-threatening ways.
There is however a growing trend among African countries to legalize same-sex
intimacy and marriages, such as Gabon which in 2020 decriminalized homosexuality
and reversed a law that made same-sex intimacy punishable by six months in prison
and a fine; and Angola which in February 2021 revised a penal code to permit same-
sex relationships and ban the discrimination of such relationships. Botswana,
Mozambique, Antigua, Barbuda, Kenya, and Seychelles, to name a few have all
decriminalized same-sex relationships.
Similarly, there are countries in Africa that are strengthening their existing laws that
prohibit homosexuality, imposing severe prison sentences, and, in some instances,
resorting to state-sanctioned violence and even the death penalty. These countries
include some northern states of Nigeria, Uganda, and Mauritania.
On March 21, 2023, the Ugandan Parliament implemented one of the world’s most
stringent anti-homosexuality regulations in the world. Those found guilty of
homosexuality would face life imprisonment, under the guise of protecting
"traditional family" values. The bill also introduced a new category of "aggravated
homosexuality," which could lead to the death penalty. However, many have raised
concerns that the severe enforcement of the bill may negatively affect the
communities and families it aims to safeguard.
Three months after the Uganda Bill was passed, on the 16th of June despite the fact
that the Supreme Court had ruled to recognize same-sex marriages contractedabroad, Nambian lawmakers attempted to pass a Bill that would define ‘spouse’ in
the Immigration Control Act as a relationship between cisgender men and women.
The existence of conflicting perspectives within Namibia's governing bodies
highlights the complexity of the issue. This internal division highlights why it is
harmful for Heads of State and other governing bodies to carelessly disseminate
hateful comments about queer people: When governing bodies publicly disseminate
hateful comments, it has the potential to exacerbate divisions and conflicts, making it
more challenging to develop and implement coherent policies that promote equality
and nondiscrimination. Hateful comments from authoritative figures can legitimize
prejudice and discrimination, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and attitudes that
affect not only the LGBTQ+ community but also society as a whole. All of this has
an impact on the public's ability to trust in the government especially when divisive
rhetoric is used by Heads of State and governing bodies. This may lead to a loss of
confidence in the democratic process and the ability of government institutions to
protect the rights and well-being of all citizens.
This is why it is important to understand that policies regarding sexual orientation in
Africa and other parts of the world do not follow a straightforward path where
constitutional protection is on one end and criminalization is on the other. Progress
in one aspect does not necessarily equate to progress in another. Botswana serves as
an illustrative example of this complexity. Despite criminalizing same-sex
relationships until 2019, they had protective laws in place to combat discrimination,
which extended to individuals of different sexual orientations.
Governments and constitutions can offer various levels of protection to queer people.
For instance, broad protection, as recently introduced in Brazil, involves
criminalizing discrimination based on sexual orientation and imposing penalties,
including imprisonment. Alternatively, there is employment protection, as outlined in
Section 6 of the Employment Equity Act in South Africa, which explicitly prohibits
discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace. These diverse
approaches highlight the multifaceted nature of policies and their impact on the
LGBTQ+ community. The lives of marginalized communities, including the queer community, are often at risk due to discrimination and prejudice. Policy decisions should prioritize safety and well-being, which can only be achieved when personal biases do not shape the policy. If progress within society is our goal then we all need to understand that it often involves challenging existing biases and prejudices. Policy should reflect the values of a just and evolving society rather than perpetuating personal opinions that are outdated or discriminatory.
Comments