Connect with us

Africa

Namibian Supreme Court hears three LGBTQ rights cases

Consensual same-sex sexual relations remain criminalized

Published

on

Activists gather outside the Supreme Court of Namibia on March 3, 2023, after the hearing of a case to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed outside the country and afford foreign spouses in these marriages spousal rights. (Photo by Arlana Shikongo)

The Supreme Court of Namibia will soon issue rulings in three pivotal cases involving LGBTQ and intersex people that will set a precedent for the recognition of same-sex marriages and spousal immigration rights for non-Namibian partners. 

Furthermore, a case is soon to be heard in the country’s high court that will challenge the southern African nation’s antiquated sodomy law. 

These cases have incited public debate around LGBTQ and intersex rights in a country where homosexuality is a controversial and polarizing subject.

This is the first time since 2001 that Namibia’s highest court will hear cases regarding same-sex relationships. It is also the first time the high court will hear arguments regarding the sodomy law.

The first hearing, which took place on March 3, was the joint cases of Digashu and Seiler-Lilles versus the government.

The applicants — both foreign nationals married to Namibian citizens — in both cases are seeking recognition of their marriages concluded outside Namibia in order to access spousal immigration rights such as permanent residence and employment authorization. 

The second hearing, which took place on March 6, was in the case of a Namibian man married to a Mexican man seeking citizenship by descent for their children born via surrogate. The government has demanded DNA testing to prove that the Namibian national is the biological father to the children. 

In the last case, a gay Namibian man is not only challenging the constitutionality of the country’s sodomy law but also the prohibition of “unnatural sexual offenses.” 

While the cases represent a crucial moment for the country’s LGBTQ and intersex community and their rights, individual people and families fighting a fight bigger than they had foreseen are at the center of these cases. 

Marriage, immigration and the law

South African citizen Daniel Digashu married Namibian national Johann Potgieter in South Africa in 2015. The couple and their son moved to Namibia in 2017.

While the move was favorable for the family, the law around same-sex marriage was not.

Digashu’s first encounter with the Home Affairs and Immigration Ministry was not to have them officially recognize his marriage. He was applying for a permit allowing him to work in the country in the company that he jointly started with his husband. 

“We’ve always had a dream to live on a farm and run this tourism company. We registered the company first, about six months before we officially moved,” Digashu said. 

He said the ministry advised him against applying for permanent residency because the country does not recognize his marriage. Officials instead told him to seek a work permit.

Despite assurances from the ministry’s personnel, the application was denied. Digashu filed an appeal, and that was denied too. 

From this moment to today, Digashu has lived a life in limbo. 

Due to the ongoing court cases, he is able to renew his visitor’s visa every few months. This, he said, comes with exhausting administrative costs that legal fees exacerbate.

Digashu said the process has put psychological, emotional and financial strain on his family. 

“Prior to finding funding it had been quite difficult financially. It is not something that a lot of people would afford. I don’t think we even could afford it. That’s why we sought out and looked for funding and luckily we found that,” he said.

As they await the judgment of their hearing, everything remains the same for Digashu and his family: His husband remains the sole breadwinner as Digashu himself still cannot work.

Namibian citizen Anette Seiler and her German wife Anita Seiler-Lilles face the same dilemma.

Neither expected to become cornerstones of the advocacy around marriage equality and LGBTQ and intersex rights in Namibia. 

“We didn’t plan to come to Namibia in the early 2000s,” said Seiler. “We thought we might want to come back when Anita didn’t have to work anymore, and that would be many years later. So, we didn’t think so much in terms of gay rights in Namibia at that time.”

“It was a very personal thing for us to get married. We were not active in Namibia or Germany in the gay community,” she added. 

Both couples have received copious amounts of support from the local LGBTQ and intersex community and civil society as they fight to be afforded the same spousal rights that would be granted to opposite-sex couples. 

Citizenship by descent and the right to family

As Namibia grapples with the recognition of same-sex marriages, the right to family and protections of them is another matter that has come under scrutiny.

Namibian citizen Phillip Lühl and his husband, Mexican national Guillermo Delgado, are fighting for their children born via surrogacy to be granted Namibian citizenship by descent. 

Delgado and Lühl say they are fighting for their children’s birthright.

While both fathers are listed on the children’s South African birth certificates, the Namibian government has demanded DNA proof that Lühl is the biological parent of the children. 

“The fact is that any other South African birth certificate is accepted but in our case it’s not because we’re of the same sex. In the case of a heterosexual couple, nobody will ever ask for any proof or dispute the validity of the document, but in our case it is,” Lühl said. 

The children have been granted Mexican citizenship by descent after a rigorous process that ended with the country’s Foreign Affairs Ministry granting it.

“They initially were not favorable but concluded that Mexico would recognize a process that was duly and procedurally done in a constituency that they recognize, namely South Africa,” Delgado explained. 

The family nevertheless plans to stay in Namibia and continue to fight the government for their children’s birthright and the recognition of their family.

Their case scrutinizes the ambit of the Namibian Constitution, which affords all its citizens protection against discrimination and the right to family. 

‘Apartheid-era’ sodomy law

In the final case, Namibian gay activist Friedel Dausab has filed a constitutional challenge against the common law crime of sodomy and the prohibition of “unnatural” sexual acts. 

Dausab brought a case against the government in June 2020 stating that the law promotes stigma and exclusion, and instigates the criminalization of consensual same-sex sexual acts between men.

Dausab argues that the offenses under the law are incompatible with the constitutional rights to equality, dignity, privacy, freedom of association and freedom of expression. He also argues that the crime of “unnatural sexual offenses” is too vague to be compatible with the constitution.

“I am challenging these laws as a lifelong and dedicated activist because I am acutely aware that criminalization is a clear obstacle to living a full, open, honest and healthy life,” he said.

Namibian Attorney General Festus Mbandeka in a recent affidavit he submitted to the high court said same-sex sexual conduct is immoral and unacceptable to many Namibians. Mbandeka further denied the existence of the sodomy law stigmatizes gay men. 

“If these men suffer any stigma it is in consequence of their choice to engage in sexual conduct considered to be morally taboo in our society,” Mbandeka said.

While it is reported that 64 sodomy-related arrests were made between 2003-2019, the offenses are rarely enforced. The country’s Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 nevertheless lists “sodomy” as a Schedule 1 offense.

The U.K.-based organization Human Dignity Trust says this listing means that either a police officer or an ordinary citizen can arrest anyone who is reasonably suspected of having committed the offense without needing a warrant. It is legal to use lethal force to kill them if the suspect attempts to evade arrest.

Namibia remains one of the few countries in southern Africa that is yet to abolish its sodomy law. Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique and South Africa have already done so. 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Botswana

Botswana repeals colonial-era sodomy law

Country’s High Court struck down statute in 2019

Published

on

The first Palapye Pride took place in Palapye, Botswana, on Nov. 1, 2025. The country has repealed the provision of its colonial-era penal code that criminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations. (Photo courtesy of the AGANG Community Network)

Botswana’s government has repealed a provision of its colonial-era penal code that criminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations.

The country’s High Court in 2019 struck down the provision. The Batswana government in 2022 said it would abide by the ruling after country’s Court of Appeals upheld it.

The government on March 26 announced the repeal of the penal code’s “unnatural offenses” section that specifically referenced any person who “has carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature” and “permits any other person to have carnal knowledge of him or her against the order of nature.”

Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana, a Batswana advocacy group known by the acronym LEGABIBO, challenged the criminalization law with the support of the Southern Africa Litigation Center. LEGABIBO in a statement it posted to its Facebook on April 25 welcomed the repeal.

“For many, these provisions were not just words on paper — they were lived realities,” said LEGABIBO. “They affected access to healthcare, safety, employment, and the freedom to love and exist openly.”

“LEGABIBO believes that the deletion of these sections is a necessary and long-overdue step toward restoring dignity and aligning our legal framework with constitutional values of equality and human rights,” it added. “It is a clear message that LGBTIQ+ persons are not criminals, and that their lives and relationships deserve protection, not punishment.”

LEGABIBO further stressed that “while this does not erase the harm of the past, it creates space for healing, inclusion, and continued progress toward full equality.”

Continue Reading

Senegal

Senegalese court issues first conviction under new anti-LGBTQ law

Man sentenced to six years in prison on April 10

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

A Senegalese court has issued the first conviction under a new law that further criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual relations.

The Associated Press notes the court in Pikine-Guédiawaye, a suburb of Dakar, the Senegalese capital, on April 10 convicted a 24-year-old man of committing “acts against nature and public indecency” and sentenced him to six years in prison.

Authorities arrested the man, who Senegalese media reports identified as Mbaye Diouf, earlier this month. The court also fined him 2 million CFA ($3,591.04).

Lawmakers in the African country on March 11 nearly unanimously passed the measure that increases the penalty for anyone convicted of engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations from one to five years in prison to five to 10 years. The bill that Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko introduced also prohibits the “promotion” or “financing” of homosexuality in Senegal.

MassResistance, an anti-LGBTQ group based in the U.S., reportedly worked with Senegalese groups to advance the bill that President Bassirou Diomaye Faye signed on March 31.

“This prison sentence is unlawful under international law,” said Human Rights Watch on Wednesday. “Senegal is bound by treaty obligations that protect every person’s right to dignity, privacy, and equality.”

Continue Reading

Eswatini

The emperor has no clothes: how rhetoric fuels repression in Eswatini

King Mswati III’s anti-LGBTQ comments can have deadly consequences

Published

on

King Mswati III (Screen capture via Eswatini TV/YouTube)

In an absolute monarchy, the words spoken by the sovereign can swiftly become a baton striking a citizen. When King Mswati III speaks, his words do not simply drift into the air as political “opinion”; they often quickly turn into, sometimes violently, state policy. This reflects the reality of Eswatini, where the right to freedom of expression, including the right to hold dissenting political views, is increasingly being systematically eroded by the very voice that claims to uphold “traditional values.”

To understand the current crisis facing the LGBTIQ+ community in Eswatini, one must view it through the lens of a broader strategy: the weaponization of culture to justify the erosion of democratic institutions, the rule of law, and human rights protections. As observed across Africa, from the streets of Harare and Dar es Salaam to the parliamentary courtrooms of Dakar and Kampala, African leaders are increasingly using the marginalised as an entry point to dismantle civil society. In Eswatini, this strategy has manifest its most brutal expression in the king’s recent harmful rhetoric concerning sexual orientation and gender identity.

The danger of the king’s words lies in how the state apparatus interprets them as a divine mandate for persecution. Recently, we have seen this “Rhetoric-to-Policy Pipeline” operate with chilling efficiency. Shortly after the Minister of Education made public vitriol against the existence of LGBTIQ+ students, reports emerged of children being expelled from schools. In a country where the king is culturally and traditionally called the “ingwenyama” (the lion), the bureaucracy acts as his pride; when leadership suggests that a particular group is “un-African” or “deviant,” the machinery of the state, along with the emboldened segments of the public, moves to purge that group from society.

For an openly gay man who has dedicated most of his adulthood to advancing equality and dignity for all, especially marginalized communities, these are not merely policy changes; they pose existential threats. When a powerful leader speaks, they offer a moral shield for the dogmatist and a legal roadmap for the policeman. In Eswatini, where political parties are banned, and the “tinkhundla” system (constituency-based system) — a system that systematically silences dissent and favors those aligned with the sovereign — is celebrated as the sole “authentic” form of governance, any identity that falls outside the narrow, state-defined “tradition” is seen as treason. By branding LGBTIQ+ rights as “ungodly” and essentially unwelcome in Eswatini, the monarchy effectively views the mere existence of queer Swazis as a subversive act against the crown.

The most harrowing example of this pattern is the assassination of human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko in January 2023. Maseko’s murder did not happen in isolation. It followed a period of heated rhetoric directed at those calling for democratic reforms. The king had publicly warned those demanding change that they would face consequences. On the evening after the king had said, “[t]hese people started the violence first, but when the state institutes a crackdown on them for their actions, they make a lot of noise blaming King Mswati for bringing in mercenaries,” Maseko was shot dead at his home in front of his family.

The parallel here is unmistakable. When the king targets the LGBTIQ+ community with his words, he is aiming at the most vulnerable. If a world-renowned human rights lawyer can be silenced following royal condemnation, what chance does a queer youth in a rural area stand when the king’s words reach the local chief or school head? This is what I call “Chaos as Governance”: a state where the law is replaced by the monarch’s whims, leaving the population in a constant cycle of managed chaos that renders collective opposition nearly impossible. Despite strong condemnation from the organization I founded, Eswatini Sexual and Gender Minorities (ESGM), recent reports already suggest growing support for the rhetoric shared by the king, indicating treacherous weeks and months ahead for ordinary queer people in Eswatini.  

The monarchy’s defense of these actions is almost always based on “African tradition.” As Mswati has shown, the ban on political parties and the suppression of minority rights are framed as a return to indigenous governance, the “tinkhundla” system. But we must ask: whose culture is being defended? Is it a culture that historically valued communal care and diverse social roles, or is it a modern, imported authoritarianism cloaked in the robes of the ancestors?

When he uses his platform at the “sibaya” (traditional gathering) to alienate a segment of his own people, he is not engaging in dialogue; he is delivering a monologue of exclusion. This weaponized version of culture serves a dual purpose. First, it offers a “neocolonial” defense against international criticism, portraying human rights as a foreign threat. Second, it creates an internal enemy, the “terrorist” political dissident or the “immoral” LGBTIQ+ person, to distract from the fact that nearly two-thirds of the population live below the poverty line. In contrast, the royal family resides in obscene luxury, acquiring fleets of expensive vehicles.

The silence of Eswatini’s neighbors worsens its situation. The Southern African Development Community (SADC), a regional organization ostensibly committed to democracy and human rights, has repeatedly allowed Mswati to evade accountability. By agreeing to remove Eswatini from the Organ Troika agenda at the king’s request in 2024, SADC sent a message to every authoritarian in the region. If you conceal your repression behind the guise of tradition, we will not intervene.

The call for freedom of expression, including LGBTIQ+ rights, is a fundamental human right vital for safety and dignity. It demands that a child should not be expelled from school because of who they are. It insists that a lawyer should not be murdered for expressing their beliefs. It states that a king’s word should not be a death sentence. We must resist the “politics of distraction” that portrays the fight for minority rights as separate from the fight for democratic reform. The dissolution of political parties in Burkina Faso, the attack on lawyers in Zimbabwe, and the criminalization of advocacy in Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda are all parts of the same pattern. They reflect a leadership class that fears its own people.

It is time for the African Union and SADC to decide whether to uphold the ideals of their lofty charters or to prioritize political convenience across Africa. For the people of Eswatini, improving livelihoods and human development can only occur when the king’s words are limited by a constitution that protects every citizen, regardless of whom they love or how they pray. Until then, the chaos is not a failure; it is the purpose. The monarch’s word may be law today, but the universal right to dignity is the only law that will endure. We must demand an Eswatini, and by extension, an Africa that seeks to improve the lives of its people, and where the “lion” protects all his people, rather than hunting those he deems “unworthy” of the shade.

Melusi Simelane is the founder and board chair of Eswatini Sexual and Gender Minorities. He is also the Civic Rights Program Manager for the Southern Africa Litigation Center.

Continue Reading

Popular