Africa
Landmark Namibia Supreme Court ruling sparks anti-gay backlash
May 16 decision recognized same-sex marriages performed abroad
An exciting and transformative moment for the LGBTQ and intersex community in Namibia has been abruptly overshadowed by a barrage of homophobic opposition following a recent ruling by the country’s Supreme Court that granted recognition to same-sex marriages conducted in foreign jurisdictions.
The Supreme Court last month delivered a historic judgment, ruling same-sex marriages performed outside the country should be recognized in order to grant foreign spouses in same-sex marriages with Namibian citizens the same immigration rights afforded to opposite-sex couples.
The decision aimed to ensure equal immigration rights for these spouses, aligning with principles of equality and nondiscrimination as enshrined in the Namibian Constitution.
This landmark decision, however, has sparked a wave of opposition, with members of Parliament, prominent political figures and religious groups expressing their discontent. It has also resulted in the mushrooming of “anti-gay” groups that are spreading hate speech and violent rhetoric on social media platforms.
Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila last week said in Parliament that the “government will bring a bill to this house to seek that Parliament modifies … the relevant common law principle in order that same-sex marriages even where solemnized in countries that permit such marriages cannot be recognized in Namibia where the right to marriage is under our laws guaranteed between men and women of mature age.”
Article 14 of the Namibian Constitution states: “Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, color, ethnic origin, nationality, religion, creed or social or economic status shall have the right to marry and to (find) a family. They shall be entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.”
Political scientist Henning Melber said while it seems some people assume this excludes same-sex marriages, the constitution does not.
“The wording does not limit equal rights to partners of the opposite sex,” he wrote in a recent opinion piece.
Furthermore, human rights activist Phil ya Nangoloh said the right to equality and nondiscrimination of LGBTQ and intersex people is permanently included in the country’s constitution.
He said various articles under Chapter 3 of the constitution — the chapter on fundamental human rights and freedoms — are shields which protect all people in Namibia without distinction of any kind.
“This right includes the right of LGBTQ+ people to sexual intercourse and marriage,” he said.
However, not everyone sees it that way.
Ephraim Nekongo of the Swapo Party Youth League, the youth wing of the ruling Swapo Party, said he rejected what he perceived as an agenda of cultural imperialism by foreign entities and the majority of Namibians neither recognize nor accept same-sex marriages or homosexuality.
“The Namibian Constitution and the will of the majority of the Namibian people must therefore be respected,” Nekongo said. “It is clear that this judgment has undermined our sacred identity as a country and a people.”
Environment, Forestry and Tourism Minister Pohamba Shifeta on Monday spoke out against homosexuality, specifically citing that sodomy is a crime under the country’s law.
He added the police should arrest those who publicly admit to being part of the LGBTQ and intersex community. Shifeta has promised to ensure that any law aimed at repealing the sodomy law is not approved.
Following allegations that the minister himself was gay, an accusation he vehemently denies, a subsequent legal action has been initiated by him against several individuals from the community who are accused of disseminating rumors about prominent leaders’ supposed homosexuality.
LGBTQ and intersex activists and allies held a press conference last week to discuss the threat of violence against the community. They acknowledged the troubling rise in hate speech, incitement of violence and hate crimes specifically targeted at LGBTQ and intersex people around the country.
A monthly drag event hosted in the country’s capital, Windhoek, the first weekend of every month was also canceled at the beginning of the month in fear of potential threats.
The polarizing conversation around rights for the LGBTQ and intersex community and the country’s apartheid-era sodomy law highlights the need for a national dialogue on LGBTQ and intersex rights, cultural diversity and constitutional interpretation. While this dialogue continues, the future of the plaintiff couples who won spousal immigration rights are once again hanging in the balance.
Home Affairs Minister Albert Kawana in response to the Supreme Court’s directive announced the ministry will refrain from processing any resident-related permits for foreign same-sex spouses married to Namibians until he receives guidance from the attorney general’s office.
The attorney general’s office in a press release said the government is currently conducting a thorough legal assessment of the judgment, taking into account its extensive legal ramifications. The statement further mentioned that the government will provide the public with an official response to the Supreme Court ruling in due course.
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.”
Senegal
Senegalese court issues first conviction under new anti-LGBTQ law
Man sentenced to six years in prison on April 10
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.”
Eswatini
The emperor has no clothes: how rhetoric fuels repression in Eswatini
King Mswati III’s anti-LGBTQ comments can have deadly consequences
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.
-
European Union4 days agoEuropean Parliament backs EU-wide conversion therapy ban
-
Federal Government3 days agoRepublicans attach five anti-LGBTQ riders to State Department funding bill
-
Rehoboth Beach5 days agoRehoboth’s Blue Moon sold; new owners to preserve LGBTQ legacy
-
National5 days agoAdvocacy groups issue US travel advisory ahead of World Cup
