Connect with us

World

Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Europe and Asia

The South Korean Supreme Court last week upheld health benefits for same-sex couples

Published

on

(Los Angeles Blade graphic)

SOUTH KOREA
The South Korean Supreme Court delivered a victory for same-sex couples last week, upholding a lower court ruling that found same-sex couples must be given equal access to benefits under the country’s National Health Insurance Service.

The ruling is a landmark as the first legal recognition of same-sex couples in the East Asian nation.

The Supreme Court ruled that the NHIS refusal to provide spousal benefits to same-sex couples was unconstitutional discrimination. The ruling is final.

The case was filed by a gay couple, So Seong-wook and Kim Yong-min, in 2021 after the NHIS revoked So’s registration as a dependent of Kim and imposed a new premium. So and Kim had been a couple since 2017 and had held a marriage ceremony in 2019.

The NHIS allows married or common-law heterosexual couples to register as dependents in employer-backed insurance but had no policy recognizing same-sex couples.

The Seoul Administrative Court ruled for the NHIS in 2022, but the following year that decision was overturned by the Seoul High Court, which ruled for the couple that the denial was discriminatory.

“When I listened to the verdict, I was so moved that I couldn’t hold back my tears,” So told reporters outside the court. “It took four years to earn this dependent status. We need to fight harder to legalize same-sex marriage going forward.”

The advocacy group Marriage for All Korea said in a statement that the decision was just a first step.

“This decision brings hope to other same-sex couples living in Korean society and is a huge milestone toward marriage equality and equal citizenship for LGBTQ people. However, same-sex couples who are not legally recognized in their marriage still experience various forms of discrimination,” the statement says.

“The lengthy and arduous lawsuits that same-sex couples must endure to gain single rights as a spouse, as seen in this case, should no longer be necessary. Fundamentally, we will continue to push for a broader marriage equality movement to eliminate all institutional discrimination that hinders same-sex couples from legally marrying and fully enjoying their rights as spouses, and for LGBTQ people in Korea to enjoy equal citizenship.”

Several bills to recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions and to ban discrimination against LGBTQ people have been introduced by opposition members in South Korea’s parliament over the years, but none has progressed.

So Sung-uk and his partner Kim Yong-min. (Photo courtesy of marriageforall.kr)

LITHUANIA
A final attempt to pass a long-stalled civil union bill before the end of the current session of Parliament came to an anticlimactic end on July 18, as the government withdrew the bill from the agenda before the final day session began.

The civil union bill had long been a bone of contention in the fractious governing coalition whose largest party is the conservative Homeland Union and includes the more progressive Freedom Party, which had made the bill a priority.

The bill passed through two readings in parliament in part with the support of leftist opposition parties, but when the opposition withdrew their support of the bill — in part to deny the government a win on the issue — the coalition no longer had enough votes to get it passed, as a segment of the Homeland Union opposed it.

Over the past month, the Freedom Party had attempted to strong-arm the Homeland Union holdouts into supporting the bill, by threatening to block Lithuania’s appointment of a European commissioner unless the party supported the bill.

In the last few days of parliament’s session before the legislature is dissolved for October elections, it seemed that the parties had come to an agreement, and the civil union bill was going to be put on the agenda for a final vote on the final day of the session.

But the opposition Social Democrats refused to play ball, once again preferring to deny the government a victory on the file, even though the Social Democrats had campaigned on supporting civil unions in the past. Without their votes, the bill would be doomed to fail.

The government withdrew the bill from the agenda rather than allow it to fail. This will allow the bill to be brought back by the new parliament in October, rather than starting the process over again.

Despite the bill’s withdrawal, anti-LGBTQ protesters met outside the parliament and burned rainbow flags. Vilnius police said they are investigating potential charges of incitement to hatred.

The two-round parliamentary election is scheduled for Oct. 13 and Oct. 27, and polling shows the Social Democrats currently hold a wide lead.

Lithuania is one of only five European Union countries that do not recognize same-sex unions. The others are Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Poland, the latter of which has proposed a civil union bill that its government hopes to pass in the fall.

UNITED KINGDOM
The newly elected Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer included a ban on conversion therapy in the King’s Speech that opened parliament on July 17, indicating that the bill will be a priority item during the session.

The King’s Speech is a tradition in UK politics, where the monarch reads a speech prepared by the government outlining its priorities for the upcoming session of parliament, usually lasting about a year.

During the election campaign, Starmer had pledged to back a transgender-inclusive ban on the abusive practice of conversion therapy, an issue which has become a political lightning rod in the UK over the past decade as a wave of anti-trans hysteria has gripped the media and much of the political class.

The previous Conservative government had pledged to ban conversion therapy six years ago but failed to bring a bill forward after floating the idea that the bill would allow conversion therapy for trans youth.

The UK LGBTQ advocacy group Stonewall praised the commitment to a conversion therapy ban in a statement.

“We welcome the new government’s commitment to banning conversion practices. Each day that these abusive practices remain legal, our communities are put at risk,” the statement says. “The government needs to urgently publish a comprehensive bill to ban these abhorrent practices once and for all.”

But the new government’s approach to trans issues is not entirely praiseworthy.

Two weeks ago, new Labour Secretary of State for Health Wes Streeting announced that his government was defending and extending a ban on puberty blockers for trans youth that was put in place by the Conservatives. That action has been denounced by trans activists and legal experts.

JAPAN
A trans woman is suing for the right to change her legal gender without first divorcing her wife, in a challenge to the nation’s laws surrounding both same-sex marriage and gender recognition.

The woman, who has not been identified, is in her 50s and has been in a long-term marriage to her wife, who is in her 40s, and neither partner wants to divorce. While she has legally changed her name to a woman’s name, her identification still lists her as “male,” which forces her to have uncomfortable conversations outing her trans status whenever she needs to show official documents.

Since 2003, it has been possible for trans people to update their legal gender in Japan, but only if they are unmarried. That essentially forces any married trans person to divorce their partner if they want to update their gender.

In 2010, the Japanese Supreme Court upheld the requirement that trans people be unmarried to update their legal gender, calling the situation “reasonable” and saying it did not violate the constitution.

But the woman’s lawyers believe the legal situation has changed.

Since 2021, several district courts across Japan have found that the ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. While that has not yet legalized same-sex marriage, these cases will eventually be decided by the Supreme Court. If the court agrees with the lower courts that the ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, then it should also find the divorce requirement for trans people to be unconstitutional.

Yoko Mizutani, one of the woman’s lawyers, says this case may also contribute to legalizing same-sex marriage.

“Many of those concerned have resigned to the notion that if same-sex marriages are not recognized, the unmarried requirement of the act will not change. If we win this petition, it could also help resolve the issue of same-sex marriage.”

SPAIN
The Constitutional Court has provisionally blocked an anti-LGBTQ law passed by the government of the Madrid Community that stripped a number of legal protections from LGBTQ people; citing constitutional, discriminatory, and jurisdictional issues.

Last year, the local government, which is led by the right-wing People’s Party and supported by the far-right Vox party, passed a bill that stripped legal recognition of trans youth, stopped allowing legal gender change without a medical diagnosis, allowed anti-LGBTQ discrimination and authorized conversion therapy.

Despite these legal protections being stripped at the local level, national laws still afforded LGBTQ people all of these rights and protections.

The national government, which is currently led by the left-wing People’s Socialist Party, filed for the injunction against the law, which it called unconstitutional, which the Constitutional Court has accepted.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Ghana

Ghanaian president welcomed to Philadelphia amid backlash over anti-LGBTQ bill

Lincoln University cancelled event with John Mahama

Published

on

Ghanaian President John Mahama (Photo via John Dramani Mahama Official Instagram)

Philadelphia Gay News published this article on March 25. The Washington Blade republished it with permission.

Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama, known for making anti-LGBTQ legislative promises, was scheduled to appear at two local colleges this week — but plans have changed. Although Mahama will still attend a community dialogue at Temple University, he will no longer be honored at Lincoln University — a Chester County HBCU. He will, however, be presented with an award by the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia. The cancellation of the Lincoln event came shortly after LGBTQ activists spoke out about his appearances.

“Due to unforeseen circumstances, the university is cancelling the visit from President John Dramani Mahama,” Athena Griffith-Howard, associate vice president of marketing and communications at Lincoln University, told PGN.

According to a press release about the scheduled event, Mahama was set to receive an honorary doctorate from Lincoln University on Thursday, March 26, “in recognition of his outstanding contributions to public service, democratic governance, peaceful international and inter-African relationships, and global advocacy for justice, equality, and education.”

Although Griffith-Howard did not respond to additional questions about the matter, Joy News — an independent news organization that markets itself as the “most credible” journalism in Ghana — reports that the university has rescinded his honorary degree and cancelled the visit due to Mahama’s anti-LGBTQ stance.

“It is both surprising and regrettable that, just hours ago, the Embassy received a communication from the university indicating that concerns had been raised by a group regarding President Mahama’s perceived position on Ghana’s Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill,” a statement released by the Ghana Embassy on March 24 reads.

Mahama has repeatedly vowed to sign the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill into law if it passes out of parliament. He has also made statements against queer and transgender people.

“The position of my government [is that] marriage is between a man and a woman. A person’s gender is determined at birth. And then also, that the family is the foundation of our nation. That is our position,” Mahama said in a speech on Nov. 18, 2025.

Intimacy laws — which criminalize LGBTQ sex and the use of sex toys — already hold a three-year prison sentence under Ghana law, stemming from legal frameworks that previously governed the country when it was controlled by the British government. Ghana became the first African country to gain independence from European colonization in 1957 — but rather than repeal the antiquated law, leaders chose to incorporate it into their own penal code in 1960. The country’s supreme court upheld the law in 2024.

The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill — often simply referred to as “the anti-LGBTQ+ bill” — would further criminalize LGBTQ people and expression and add new risks for allyship. If passed, the punishment for intimacy violations would increase to a possible five-year prison sentence. LGBTQ people could also be punished for simply identifying as LGBTQ with a new three-year prison sentence.

The proposal would also ban LGBTQ serving organizations, even those that only partly serve LGBTQ people. Violations would include up to five years in prison. Allies could face 10 years in prison for supporting LGBTQ people or promoting LGBTQ rights online, in newspapers, or through other verbal or written communications. Journalists who report on LGBTQ topics are also at risk.

The bill would force families and community members to report those found in violation of the statute to local law enforcement.

“If the parliament of the people of Ghana endorse the bill and vote on it and pass it and it comes to me as president, I will sign it,” Mahama said during his November speech.

Since the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill was introduced in 2021, LGBTQ Ghanaians and allies have experienced widespread discrimination and physical violence — including harassment and arrests, raids on LGBTQ centers (which have led to at least one closure), as well as a hostile media landscape. When the bill was first passed by parliament in 2024, anti-LGBTQ incidents more than doubled.

The proposal was not signed into law by the former President Nana Akufo-Addo, who characterized the proposal as a backsliding of human rights. At the time, Ghana’s finance ministry also warned that signing the bill would place several billions of dollars in funding in jeopardy as a similar anti-LGBTQ bill in Uganda led the World Bank to suspend new funding to that country.

This threat would be especially difficult for Ghana to bear given recent funding cuts made by the Trump administration, which have been especially problematic for some African countries.

Ghana previously relied on USAID funding for social programs and health services, but Trump’s funding cuts led to a $156 million loss — including approximately $78 million that previously funded malaria prevention, maternal and child health, family planning, reproductive health, nutrition, and the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Despite the funding cuts, anti-LGBTQ leaders — including those in Ghana — have been emboldened and empowered by the Trump administration’s own anti-LGBTQ efforts, citing that they no longer fear economic sanctions if their own anti-LGBTQ bill passes.

According to activists, Mahama urged parliament to reintroduce the bill after he took office in January 2025 — around the same time Trump began issuing executive orders, which have negatively impacted LGBTQ Americans.

Mahama is currently in the U.S. to lead a delegation at the United Nations to advocate for reparatory justice for the Transatlantic Slave Trade. He will present a landmark resolution to the United Nations General Assembly in New York City on March 25 — seeking a formal declaration of the Transatlantic Slave Trade as a crime against humanity. The visit also includes a wreath-laying ceremony to honor the lives of enslaved Africans who perished in the U.S.

LGBTQ rights advocates keenly understand the importance of holding the U.S. accountable as direct drivers of the Transatlantic Slave Trade and for the atrocities that occurred to African people on American soil as the country built its economic and social power off of their oppression.

In a press release about Mahama’s visit to Philadelphia, a growing coalition of Philadelphia’s LGBTQ and allied leaders — including Philly Pride 365, GALAEI and ACT UP Philadelphia — called the invitation to speak at Temple University “even more concerning” given the human rights focus of the delegation.

“You cannot come to a global stage calling for justice, repair and recognition of historical harm while simultaneously supporting or advancing policies that criminalize and endanger another marginalized group,” said Tyrell Brown of Philly Pride 365 in the joint statement. “That contradiction is not just political. It reflects a fundamental failure to understand intersectionality and the interconnected nature of oppression.”

“Justice is not selective. Human rights are not conditional,” Brown continued. “If we are serious about repair, it must extend to all people — especially those currently being targeted by state-sanctioned harm.”

There is a colonialist link between the continued oppression of LGBTQ Africans with harmful rhetoric and money coming from the U.S. At least 20 US-based conservative Christian groups, which have spent over $54 million since 2007 on anti-LGBTQ efforts in Africa, are linked to anti-LGBTQ bills and laws across the continent.

“We support the reparations resolution. The argument it rests on is morally sound,” reads a press release issued by JustRight Ghana — a Ghana-based human rights organization. “The transatlantic slave trade classified human beings as property based on what they were born as. It said that certain categories of people, by virtue of their birth, had no rights, no dignity, and no protection from the power of the state.”

“That is the same logic that runs through every clause of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill 2025. Section 3 says that being born with a particular sexual orientation makes you a criminal,” the press release goes on to state. “The moral architecture is identical. The only thing that has changed is who the target is.”

The World Affairs Council of Philadelphia still intends to present Mahama with its International Statesperson Award on March 27.

A blurb about the award on the institution’s website reads, “The International Statesperson Award of the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia is the highest honor the Council bestows — a tribute for global leadership. It is presented periodically and awarded to distinguished international figures and world leaders whose work has advanced the twin goals of peace and freedom and resulted in a significant positive impact on world affairs.”

Mahama is also still invited to participate in a community dialogue event that will be held at Temple University on the evening of March 26. The event is advertised as celebrating Ghanaian music and artistic culture, comedy, and heritage — featuring celebratory performances as well as a dialogue with Mahama and other national leaders.

“Attendees will have the opportunity to hear firsthand from the president on Ghana’s vision and emerging opportunities, engage in conversations that help shape diaspora partnerships, and explore business, investment, and cultural collaboration opportunities,” reads an Instagram post about the event. “The evening also marks a historic moment as part of the president’s first official visit to Philadelphia.”

The event was planned before Lincoln University canceled its conferment and according to a press release, Mahama intends to convene with people of the Ghanaian diaspora during the Temple University visit.

“This conversation reflects something bigger than a single event,” reads an Instagram post published by Temple University Black Alumni Alliance about the event. “It represents connection across the diaspora, leadership across borders, and the importance of creating spaces where global perspectives and lived experiences can meet.”

In response to PGN’s request for comments and answers to questions, Steve Orbanek, Temple University’s executive director of communications and media relations, emailed the following statement:

“Temple University unequivocally opposes the exclusion of or discrimination against members of the LGBTQIA+ community. Temple takes pride in providing an inclusive and welcoming environment for all students, faculty, staff, alumni, neighbors and friends regardless of their race, nationality, religion, gender, sexual orientation or identity.

“President Mahama will be in the United States to attend the United Nations General Assembly during the International Day of Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery and the Transatlantic Slave Trade. The US-Ghana Chamber of Commerce invited him to participate in a community event and approached Temple about using a venue on campus.

“As a public university, Temple regularly provides space for speakers as part of our ongoing commitment to academic inquiry, open dialogue and public service. We have made venues available for third-party organizations, including political parties or campaigns, regardless of their political viewpoint or stance. The presence of any speaker on campus is not an endorsement by Temple University of the speaker or their views.

The Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill that has been recently reintroduced in Ghana’s Parliament is deeply troubling and runs counter to the mission and values of Temple University. Temple’s strength is its people, and every member of our community adds to the cultural richness of our institution. We are committed to cultivating an educational environment founded on respect, open-mindedness, and the appreciation of others.”

The Philadelphia coalition of LGBTQ leaders rejects the idea that hosting a speaker does not reflect the views of the host institution and underlined that platforming political leaders with ties to problematic policies still produces harm.

“Providing a platform to a leader advancing policies that endanger LGBTQ lives and undermine HIV prevention is deeply irresponsible. Institutions of higher education should not normalize or legitimize harm under the guise of dialogue,” said Sam Sitrin of ACT UP Philadelphia in the joint statement.

“Universities should be spaces that uphold human rights and evidence-based public health,” added Jose Demarco of ACT UP Philadelphia. “Hosting leaders associated with policies that criminalize LGBTQ people and undermine HIV prevention sends the wrong message at a time when lives are at stake.”

Temple’s Center for Anti-Racism — an initiative of Temple’s Office of Institutional Diversity, Equity, Advocacy, and Leadership (IDEAL) — which is promoted on flyers and social media as hosting the event, has not responded to PGN’s questions or requests for comments. The event, which was previously included on the university’s events listings, is no longer visible but has not been canceled as of Wednesday, March 25. It is unclear if the university is taking any steps to protect or uplift LGBTQ students during the event.

The Philadelphia coalition of LGBTQ leaders called the decision to host the event in light of the local community’s response “harmful and careless.” They also raised concerns about Temple University’s process to repair wounds and are pressuring Temple to cancel the event and formally apologize to Philadelphia’s LGBTQ community.

“According to organizers, the university had knowledge of the concerns surrounding President Mahama’s [anti-LGBTQ] record as early as Thursday [March 19] but did not conduct meaningful outreach to community partners, nonprofits, or local leaders most impacted by the issue,” the coalition’s press release reads.

“When institutions fail to proactively engage communities on issues of this magnitude, it reveals a disconnect between stated values and actual practice.”

Coalition members joined additional Philadelphia-based leaders in sending a letter to Temple University’s IDEAL initiative and Center for Anti-Racism — noting their concern for the event but also openness to dialoguing directly with the event’s organizers to seek intentionality and transparency.

“This is not an abstract policy discussion. It is about the safety, dignity, and survival of LGBTQ people globally. For many in our communities, including African and Caribbean diaspora members here in Philadelphia, these policies have direct emotional, familial, and cultural impact,” the letter reads. “Hosting this dialogue without intentional accountability risks legitimizing rhetoric and policies that endanger lives.”

Those who signed the letter described themselves as leaders who are Black and Brown, LGBTQ, representatives of HIV/AIDS organizations, and individuals working in government, civil society and DEI spheres in Philadelphia. They include activists of ACT UP Philadelphia, representatives from SMUG International and Bebashi, Ronda Goldfein of the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania, Jacen Bowman of Philadelphia Black Pride, Andre Ford of The COLOURS Organization, Sappho Fulton of Womxn Beyond Borders, Hazel Edwards of GALAEI, Simon Trowell of Mazzoni Center, José Benitez of Philadelphia FIGHT, Tyrell Brown of Philly Pride 365, Darius McLean of William Way LGBT Community Center, state Rep. Andre Carroll, state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, Philadelphia Councilmember Kendra Brooks, and Philadelphia Councilmember Rue Landau.

They underline that proceeding without addressing concerns would risk harm to the very students and communities IDEAL purports to support.

“As Black and Brown and African LGBTQ leaders, with the support of our allies, we are requesting that the organizers of this event include questions about this truly dangerous legislation and highlight the real world impact on Ghanaian LGBTQ people, their families and their communities,” the letter insists. “Though we believe in autonomy for all nations, and that Americans should not dictate the policy of other nations, we also believe that these deadly policies should not go unquestioned or unchallenged, especially since this event is sponsored by IDEAL, which has a strong commitment to the BIPOC, LGBTQ, and Ghanaian students at Temple.”

They underlined that questions about the matter should come directly from the event’s organizers rather than become the responsibility of the community during a Q&A. The signed leaders hope to receive a response by Wednesday evening — and PGN will follow up with continued reporting when more information about the university and community’s plans are known.

“Silence, in this moment, is not neutrality: it is complicity,” the letter emphasizes.

Continue Reading

Japan

Japanese Supreme Court to consider marriage equality

Japan only G7 country that does not legally recognize same-sex couples

Published

on

Japanese Supreme Court (Photo public domain)

The Japanese Supreme Court on Wednesday said it will consider six marriage equality lawsuits.

NHK, the country’s public broadcaster, noted all 15 of the court’s justices will consider the case.

Japan is the only G7 country that does not legally recognize same-sex couples, despite several court rulings in recent years that found the denial of marriage benefits to gays and lesbians unconstitutional.

Tokyo High Court Judge Ayumi Higashi last November upheld Japan’s legal definition of a family as a man and a woman and their children.

Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, who became the country’s first female head of government last October, opposes marriage rights for same-sex couples. She has also reiterated the constitution’s assertion that the family is an institution based around “the equal rights of husband and wife.”

Same-sex couples can legally marry in Taiwan, Nepal, and Thailand.

NHK reported the Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling in early 2027.

Continue Reading

Botswana

Lorato ke Lorato: marriage equality, democracy, and the unfinished work of justice in Botswana

High Court considering marriage equality case

Published

on

By

(Bigstock photo)

As Botswana prepares for the resumption of a landmark marriage equality case before the High Court on July 14–15, the country finds itself at a critical constitutional crossroads.  

At first glance, the matter may appear to be about whether two women, Bonolo Selelelo and Tsholofelo Kumile, can have their love legally recognized. At its core however, this case is about something far more profound: the dismantling of patriarchy, the decolonization of law, and the integrity of Botswana’s constitutional democracy. 

Beyond marriage: a question of power 

Marriage, as a legal institution, has never been neutral. It has historically functioned as a  mechanism for regulating women’s bodies, sexuality, and social roles within a patriarchal  order. To deny LBQ (lesbian, bisexual, and queer) women access to marriage is not merely to exclude them from a legal benefit, it is to reinforce a hierarchy of relationships, where heterosexual unions are deemed legitimate and all others invisible. This case therefore challenges the very foundations of who gets to love, who gets to belong, and who gets to be protected under the law. 

As feminist scholars have long argued, patriarchy is sustained through institutions that  appear ordinary but are deeply political. The law is one such institution. And it is precisely  here that this case intervenes: by asking whether Botswana’s legal system will continue to uphold exclusion, or evolve to reflect the constitutional promise of equality. 

A constitutional journey: Botswana’s courts and human dignity

This is not the first time Botswana’s courts have been called upon to affirm the dignity of  LGBTQI+ persons. Over the past decade, the judiciary has built a progressive body of  jurisprudence grounded in equality, nondiscrimination, and human dignity. 

In Attorney General v. Rammoge and Others (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. CACGB 128-14, 2016), the Court of Appeal upheld the right of LEGABIBO to register as an organization. The court affirmed that: 

“The refusal to register the appellant society was not only unlawful, but a violation of the  respondents’ fundamental rights to freedom of association.”

This was followed by the ND v. Attorney General of Botswana (MAHGB-000449-15,  2017) case, where the High Court recognized the right of a transgender man to change his gender marker. The court held: 

“Gender identity is an integral part of a person’s identity … and any interference with  that identity is a violation of dignity.” 

In Letsweletse Motshidiemang v. Attorney General (MAHGB-000591-16, 2019), the High Court decriminalized same-sex activity, declaring sections of the Penal Code unconstitutional. Justice Leburu powerfully stated: 

“Human dignity is harmed when minority groups are marginalized.” 

This decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Attorney General v. Motshidiemang (CACGB-157-19, 2021), where the court emphasized: 

“The Constitution is a dynamic instrument … it must be interpreted in a manner that gives effect to the values of dignity, liberty, and equality.” 

These cases collectively establish a clear principle: the Constitution of Botswana protects all persons, not just the majority. 

The marriage equality case now asks a logical next question: If LGBTQI+ persons are entitled to dignity, identity, and freedom from criminalization, why are their relationships still denied recognition? 

Decolonizing the law: What is truly ‘UnAfrican’? 

Opponents of marriage equality often argue that homosexuality is “unAfrican.” This claim, while politically powerful, is historically inaccurate. Same-sex relationships and diverse gender identities have existed across African societies long before colonial rule. What is foreign, however, are the laws that criminalize these identities. 

Botswana’s anti-sodomy laws were inherited from British colonial legal systems, not from  indigenous Tswana culture. As scholars of African history have demonstrated, colonial  administrations imposed rigid Victorian moral codes that erased and suppressed existing  sexual diversity. To claim that homosexuality is unAfrican, while defending colonial-era laws, is therefore a contradiction.

A truly decolonial approach to the law requires us to ask: Whose morality are we upholding? And whose history are we erasing? 

Marriage equality, in this sense, is not a Western imposition: it is part of a broader project of reclaiming African dignity, plurality, and humanity. 

Democracy on trial: the question of separation of powers

This case also raises important questions about the health of Botswana’s democracy. 

Following the 2021 Court of Appeal decision affirming the decriminalization of same-sex  relations, Botswana witnessed public demonstrations, including marches led by groups such as the Evangelical Fellowship of Botswana (EFB), opposing the judgment and calling for the retention of discriminatory laws. 

While public participation is a cornerstone of democracy, these events raise deeper concerns about the separation of powers. Courts are constitutionally mandated to interpret the law and protect fundamental rights, even when such decisions are  unpopular. When judicial decisions grounded in constitutional principles are publicly resisted on moral or religious grounds, it risks undermining the authority of the courts  and the rule of law itself. 

Democracy is not simply about majority opinion: it is about the protection of minority rights within a constitutional framework. 

Botswana is not a theocracy 

It is also important to clarify a recurring misconception: Botswana is not a Christian nation. 

Botswana is a secular constitutional democracy and more accurately, a pluralistic society that recognizes and respects diversity of belief, culture, and identity. The Constitution does not elevate one religion above others, nor does it permit religious doctrine to  dictate legal rights. The law must serve all citizens equally, regardless of faith. 

To frame marriage equality as a threat to Christianity is therefore misplaced. The question before the courts is not theological, but constitutional: Does the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage violate the rights to equality and nondiscrimination?

Love, equality, and the future of justice 

At its heart, this case is about love, but it is also about power, history, and justice. It asks whether Botswana is prepared to move beyond colonial legal frameworks and patriarchal  norms, and to embrace a future grounded in equality, dignity, and inclusion. 

It asks whether the Constitution will continue to be interpreted as a living document, one that evolves with society, or remain constrained by outdated moral assumptions. Ultimately, it asks whether Botswana’s democracy can hold true to its founding promise: that all persons are equal before the law. 

As the High Court prepares to hear this case in July 2026, the nation has an opportunity to affirm not only the rights of two individuals, but the broader principle that love, in all its diversity, deserves recognition, and protection. 

Lorato ke lorato.  

Love is love. 

Justice, if it is to mean anything at all, must make space for it.

Nozizwe is the CEO of LEGABIBO (Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana)

Continue Reading

Popular