Connect with us

News

Uganda president to sign anti-gay bill into law

Int’l LGBT advocates urge Obama administration to take action

Published

on

Yoweri Museveni, Uganda, gay news, Washington Blade

Uganda President Yoweri Museveni has signaled he would sign an anti-gay bill into law (Photo by the U.K. Department for International Development; courtesy Wikimedia Commons).

Despite earlier indications that he wouldn’t approve the measure, Uganda President Yoweri Museveni on Friday signaled his intent to sign a controversial “anti-homosexuality bill” into law.

News that Museveni would sign the bill came via Twitter from Ofwono Opondo, a spokesperson for the Uganda government, who said the Uganda president told members of the NRM party in parliament  he’d “assent” to the legislation.

Multiple news outlets, including Buzzfeed, confirmed that Museveni intended to sign the bill into law.

In a subsequent tweet, Opondo later advised supporters of gay rights to “take it easy,” saying Uganda is a sovereign country and the measure can challenged in the courts.

Homosexual acts are already illegal in Uganda, but the proposed legislation would impose a life sentence in prison for “aggravated homosexuality” — repeated offenses, homosexual sex with a minor or having gay sex while HIV positive. Failure to report gay people to the government would also be made a crime. It includes a provision that makes officiating a same-sex marriage ceremony punishable by seven years in prison.

Controversial provisions that would have instituted the death penalty for homosexual acts were removed from the bill in parliament.

Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, blamed the situation on the efforts by U.S. evangelicals, who reportedly went to the Uganda and spoke out against homosexuality.

“Unless this bill is stopped from becoming law, lives will be destroyed, and countless people will be punished for an immutable characteristic,” Griffin said. “Anti-LGBT Americans advocated for laws further criminalizing LGBT people in Uganda, and it looks like they are now getting their wish. Whether it’s Brian Brown advocating for anti-LGBT laws in Russia or Scott Lively calling for the further criminalization of LGBT people in Uganda, anti-LGBT Americans must stop exporting their hate abroad.”

Among these evangelicals is Scott Lively, who in 2009 travelled to Uganda to help lawmakers craft the legislation. Known for his comparison of the LGBT movement to the Nazi movement in twentieth century Germany, Lively is facing a lawsuit from the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights for illegally fomenting anti-gay sentiment in Uganda.

In response to the latest news, the Center for Constitutional Rights issued an organizational statement blaming Lively for his contribution to passage of the anti-gay bill.

“LGBTI Ugandans will become second-class citizens and even more vulnerable to violence and abuse,” the statement says. “Right wing U.S. evangelical Scott Lively played a major role in the creation of the bill, and we will continue to hold him accountable in U.S. courts on behalf of our clients, Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG).”

After the Uganda parliament approved the legislation unexpectedly in December, Uganda President Yoweri Museveni reportedly said he wouldn’t sign the legislation unless he received scientific proof showing people are gay by choice, and not by birth.

According to Uganda press, scientists in the country prepared a report for Museveni along those lines. Among the findings was that widely discredited notion that “50 percent of the homosexuals revert to heterosexuality if rehabilitated in time.”

But the news that Museveni would sign the bill into law isn’t the only anti-gay development coming out of Uganda. As Box Turtle Bulletin’s Jim Burroway points out, Uganda press reported parliament leaders back Museveni’s plan to hold in jail without possibility of bail sodomy suspects — in addition to those suspected of being “defilers and rapists.” Further, he reportedly tasked the Ministry of Justice to expedite the process of amending the Constitution to that effect.

Other LGBT advocates — many of whom have been speaking out against the Uganda anti-gay bill since its introduction in 2009 — responded to the news by urging the Obama administration to take action.

Mark Bromley, chair of Council for Global Equality, said his organization is “still trying to confirm these latest reports” and urged the Obama administration to compel Museveni to change his mind about signing the bill.

“We are still trying to confirm these latest reports,” Bromley said. “That said, now is the time for the Administration to leverage all of its diplomatic assets to ensure that President Museveni understands the full consequences of this decision and the impact it would have on our bilateral relationship. Museveni has pledged to reject the current Bill. We certainly hope the United States will hold him to that pledge.”

Robyn Lieberman, senior policy strategist for the international group Human Rights First, also urged the Obama administration to prevent Museveni from signing the legislation.

“President Obama should immediately publicly condemn this legislation and emphasize the negative consequences enactment of this law will have on Uganda’s relationship with the United States,” Liberman said. “He should also make it clear to President Museveni that he will take other measures in the relationship if this bill is signed, including diplomatic, economic, and multilateral actions. This is a matter of life and death for LGBT people in Uganda and beyond, and it demands  the attention of this U.S. President who has been a stellar leader on LGBT issues in this country.”

Lieberman also said “there should be no doubt” the announcement that Museveni would sign the anti-gay bill is in response to recent passage of similar anti-gay legislation in countries like Nigeria and Russia.

Neither the White House nor the State Department immediately responded to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on what action the administration will take in the wake of the news that Museveni intends to sign the anti-gay bill. The administration, as well as Obama himself during the National Prayer Breakfast in 2010, have previously spoken out against the legislation.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Africa

Senegalese NGO claims new president discussed LGBTQ rights with top EU official

Jamra Ong Islamique demands government expedite anti-LGBTQ law

Published

on

Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye (Screen capture via Reuters/YouTube)

A Senegalese NGO has called on the government to expedite the process of enacting an anti-LGBTQ law after the country’s new president met with a top EU official.

Jamra Ong Islamique made the call during a press conference last Wednesday after newly elected Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye met with European Council President Charles Michel.

Mamae Makhtar Gueye of Jamra Ong Islamique claimed the meeting between the two dignitaries involved an acknowledgment of LGBTQ rights in Senegal. Gueye said Michel is an LGBTQ ally who wants to change Senegal’s cultural customs that do not condone LGBTQ rights.

“His ardent proselytism for the expansion of LGBT ideology could not leave Jamra indifferent,” said Gueye. “Countries including Gabon, Central African Republic, and Mauritius, amongst others, that underestimated the nuisance of these propagandists of homosexuality paid dearly for it because these global lobbyists ended up legalizing this abomination, so beware.” 

Gueye, however, has received a lot of backlash and has been accused of not raising the same sentiments during the tenure of former President Macky Sall, who also met with Michel.

“Did he come as a defender of the LGBT cause or as a European official? Did he come to talk about LGBT rights or partnership agreement between the European Union and Senegal?,” asked Ahmadou Diaw, a Senegalese academic. “Mr. Gueye should know when to alert and when to shut up.”

Cheikh Maï Niang, a social commentator, described Jamra as a “useless organization” that is focused on restricting the freedom of the Senegalese people.

“They are absolutely good for nothing apart from eating the taxpayer’s money,” said Niang. “Where is the democracy we cry about everyday? Seems like they are here to restrict the freedom of the Senegalese people.”

“Not everyone is interested in religion,” added Niang. “We wasted too much time with these useless things. Let’s talk about developing the country. People should live their lives in the manner they want.”

Jamra has previously made proclamations against the LGBTQ community.

The organization in February — before Senegal’s presidential election that took place on March 24 — accused the EU Electoral Observation Mission to Senegal of wanting to indoctrinate Senegalese people with their pro-LGBTQ narrative.

Senegal does not have a law that specifically criminalizes those who identify as LGBTQ or advocate for them. Article 319 of the country’s penal code criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual relations with a fine and between one and five years in prison.

Some Senegalese lawmakers have sought to increase the prison sentence to 10 years for anyone convicted of engaging in homosexuality. These efforts thus far have not been successful.

Samm Jikko Yi (Together for the Safeguarding of Values), an Islamic lobby group that includes many organizations, in 2022 organized an anti-LGBTQ demonstration in Dakar, the country’s capital. Protesters called for harsher penalties for Senegalese who identify as LGBTQ and/or advocate for LGBTQ rights.

The Washington Blade in 2022 noted LGBTQ people have suffered physical and sexual abuse while in prison.

Senegal’s deep religious roots, which are largely Islamic, have contributed to the lack of tolerance of LGBTQ people in the country. This reality has prompted LGBTQ Senegalese to either flee the country or remain in the closet.

Media reports indicate there are fewer bars, clubs and other places where LGBTQ people can freely socialize.

Continue Reading

Maryland

What Anne Arundel County school board candidates think about book bans

State lawmakers passed Freedom to Read Act in April

Published

on

Parents in some Maryland school districts have organized campaigns to restrict the kinds of books allowed in school libraries. (Photo by Kylie Cooper/Baltimore Banner)

BY ROYALE BONDS | Parents’ efforts to restrict content available to students in school libraries has become a contentious issue in Maryland. Conservative parent groups, such as Moms for Liberty, have been working to get books they believe are inappropriate removed from libraries in Carroll and Howard counties, sparking protests, new policies, and even a state law.

The Freedom to Read Act, passed in April, sets standards that books cannot be removed from public and school libraries due to an author’s background. Library staff that uphold the standard are protected under this act. The law, however, does not prohibit removing books deemed “sexually explicit,” the stated reason local Moms for Liberty chapters challenged school library books.

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner website.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. Council member proposes change for Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs

Parker also seeks increased funding for LGBTQ programs in FY 2025 budget

Published

on

D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5) (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only LGBTQ member, has asked his fellow Council members to support a proposal to change the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs to become a “stand-alone entity outside the Executive Office of the Mayor to allow for greater transparency and accountability that reflects its evolution over the years.”

In an April 30 letter to each of his 12 fellow Council members, Parker said he plans to introduce an amendment to the city’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Support Act to make this change for the LGBTQ Affairs Office.

His letter also calls for adding to the city’s FY 2025 budget two specific funding proposals that local LGBTQ activists submitted to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser that the mayor did not include in her budget proposal submitted to the Council. One calls for $1.5 million to fund the completion of the build out and renovation for the D.C. Center for the LGBTQ Community’s new building in the city’s Shaw neighborhood and $300,000 in subsequent years to support the LGBTQ Center’s operations.

Parker’s second budget proposal calls for what he said was about $450,000 to fund 20 additional dedicated LGBTQ housing vouchers as part of the city’s existing program to provide emergency housing support for LGBTQ residents and other residents facing homelessness.

“The Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs currently manages about 90 vouchers across various programs and needs,” Parker said in his letter to fellow Council members. “Adding an additional 20 vouchers will cost roughly $450,000,” he wrote, adding that dedicated vouchers “play a crucial role in ensuring LGBTQ+ residents of the District can navigate the complex process of securing housing placements.”

In her proposed FY ’25 budget, Bowser calls for a 7.6 percent increase in funding for the Office of LGBTQ Affairs, which amounts to an increase of $132,000, bringing the office’s total funding to $1.7 million.

“To be clear, I support the strong work and current leadership of the Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs,” Parker says in his letter to fellow Council members. “This push for change is in recognition of the office’s notable achievements and the significant demands being placed on it, which require a greater level of accountability.”

Parker told the Blade in an April 30 telephone interview that he believes Japer Bowles, the current director of the Office of L|GBTQ Affairs is doing an excellent job in operating the office, but he believes the office would be able to do more for the LGBTQ community under the change he is proposing.

“Making it a stand-alone office versus it being clustered within the Community Affairs division of the mayor’s office, it will get more attention,” Parker told the Blade. “The leadership will have greater flexibility to advocate for the interest of LGBTQ residents, And we will be able to conduct greater oversight of the office,” he said, referring to the Council’s oversight process.

Parker noted that other community constituent offices in the mayor’s office, including the Office of Latino Affairs and the Office of Veterans Affairs are stand-alone offices that he hopes to bring about for the LGBTQ Affairs Office. He said Council member Brianne Nadeau, who chairs the Council committee that has oversight for the LGBTQ Affairs Office, has expressed support for his proposal.

Also expressing support for Parker’s proposal to make the LGBTQ Affairs Office a stand-alone office is the D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commission Rainbow Caucus. Vincent Slatt, the caucus’s chairperson, submitted testimony last week before the D.C. Council Committee on Public Works and Operations, which is chaired by Nadeau, calling for making the LGBTQ Affairs Office a stand-alone office outside the Executive Office of the Mayor.

Slatt also stated in his testimony that the office has a “chronic staffing shortage” and recommended that at least three additional staff members be assigned to the office.

Daniel Gleick, the mayor’s press secretary, told the Blade the mayor’s office is reviewing Parker’s budget proposals, including the proposed change for the Office of LGBTQ Affairs.

But in testimony at a May 1, D.C. Council budget hearing before the Council’s Committee on Executive Administration and Labor, Lindsey Parker, Mayor Bowser’s Chief of Staff, appeared to express skepticism over making the LGBTQ Affairs office a stand-alone office. Lindsey Parker expressed her thoughts on the proposed change when asked about it by Councilmember Anita Bonds (D-At-Large), who chairs the committee that held the hearing.

“I would proffer that it doesn’t matter whether the agency is within the EOM [Executive Office of the Mayor] or not,” Lindsey Parker told Bonds. “They will still be reporting up into one would argue the most important agency in the D.C. government, which is the one that supports the mayor,” Lindsey Parker said. “So, it’s the closest to the mayor that you can get,” she said “So, you could pull it out and have a different budget chapter. I actually think that’s confusing and convoluted.”

Lindsey Parker added, “The Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs, with their six FTEs right now, if they were a stand-alone function they wouldn’t have all the non-personnel services in order to operate. They need to be under sort of the shop of the EOM in order to get those resources.” 

By FETs Lindsey Parker was referring to the term Full Time Equivalent employees.  

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular