Members of Parliament Consider New Strategy to Enact Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill

According to a pro-gay website (Freedom and Roam Uganda), there is concern that the Anti-Homosexuality Bill has returned with a new legislative strategy. FARUG reports this morning that amendments have already been made to Section 145 of the Penal Code Act. However, when I talked to Helen Kawesa, spokeswoman for Parliament, she knew nothing of a bill to amend Section 145.  Initially, she thought I was asking about the Anti-Homosexuality Bill which she said is “still in committee.”

Apparently, a new bill has not been tabled yet, but indeed, according to other sources, there is a proposal to achieve the same ends as the Anti-Homosexuality Bill by amending the Penal Code Act. Section 145 now prohibits “canal knowledge of any person against the order of nature.” The proposal would prohibit sexual acts with a person of the same sex and the use of any media in a way that depicted homosexuality in a positive manner. Life in prison and the death penalty are also included according to the FARUG report.

Currently, it is not known who plans to offer the amendment or when it will be offered. A review of the order paper for today finds nothing on the subject. According to Susan Merembe of the Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), there is no bill at present. On SMUG’s Facebook page, she said

The bill has not yet been tabled. Try to breathe, the info was just an update to keep your eyes open. Political lobbying really, nothing too exciting.

Rumors that changes to the code have already been made are apparently incorrect. However, this political lobbying may signal that a renewed effort is on the horizon.

16 thoughts on “Members of Parliament Consider New Strategy to Enact Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill”

  1. If this is indeed one of the claimed ‘versions’ of the Bahati Bill, then there are, along with the key similarities with Clause 3 of the ‘original’ Bahati Bill, a couple of quite startling features:-

    1. the first clause just says ‘sexual act’ – that could be very broadly interpreted, couldn’t it? (those MPs should think very carefully before grunting and slapping backs)

    2. anal intercourse is to be a ‘life imprisonment’ offence for EVERYONE (which I suppose is ‘fair’ … PROVIDED there is a comprehensive system of checks, inspections, examinations, bedroom CCTV, and so forth, to ensure that this new provision is applied equitably).

    Hmmmmm!

    (The ‘all-encompassing anal sex’ bit – totally unrealistic, and probably not very popular with many punters – suggests that this is a ‘fake’ … though in the ‘Alice through the Looking Glass’ world of UG politics, we really can’t be too careful. Remember May 2011.)

  2. Well, you are free to speculate as to the contents of the revised bill. Of course, some of things you have mentioned above are either figments of your own imagination or the imagination of the Kampala-based puppet gay sex propagandists. When the time is right, the Ugandan MPs will display the correct and authentic version of the legislation for all to see. I think it should be a masterpiece when it is finally released.

  3. Members of Parliament Consider New Strategy to Enact Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill

    Watercooler talk as usual…..

  4. So you say it is ‘fake’, ‘Maazi NCO’? Is that what you are saying?

    I wonder if, given what you yourself have admitted above, there are various draft ‘versions’ (not all known to you?) of the Bill floating around, and this is one of them. Clearly you don’t like this ‘version’, speaking openly as it does of slaughter and savagery, and would perhaps prefer a more devious and subtle approach.

    One thing is for certain: I didn’t fake it; nor am I imaging what’s written there.

  5. So you say it is ‘fake’, ‘Maazi NCO’? Is that what you are saying?

    I wonder if, given what you yourself have admitted above, there are various draft ‘versions’ (not all known to you?) of the Bill floating around, and this is one of them. Clearly you don’t like this ‘version’, speaking openly as it does of slaughter and savagery, and would perhaps prefer a more devious and subtle approach.

    One thing is for certain: I didn’t fake it; nor am I imaging what’s written there.

  6. Well, you are free to speculate as to the contents of the revised bill. Of course, some of things you have mentioned above are either figments of your own imagination or the imagination of the Kampala-based puppet gay sex propagandists. When the time is right, the Ugandan MPs will display the correct and authentic version of the legislation for all to see. I think it should be a masterpiece when it is finally released.

  7. Sorry – there is another ‘startling’ feature (perhaps the most startling feature of all): the idea that that there is such a thing as a ‘consensual same-sex relationship’ is formally recognized … and this would constitute a major paradigmatic shift in thinking.

    IF this is a ‘fake’, one wonders who might have faked it. MPs who wants to keep the death penalty for consensual relations, but ‘divorce’ the measure from the sullied ‘Bahati brand’? I very much doubt that FARUG would do it – they are far too careful to do such a thing, I reckon.

  8. If this is indeed one of the claimed ‘versions’ of the Bahati Bill, then there are, along with the key similarities with Clause 3 of the ‘original’ Bahati Bill, a couple of quite startling features:-

    1. the first clause just says ‘sexual act’ – that could be very broadly interpreted, couldn’t it? (those MPs should think very carefully before grunting and slapping backs)

    2. anal intercourse is to be a ‘life imprisonment’ offence for EVERYONE (which I suppose is ‘fair’ … PROVIDED there is a comprehensive system of checks, inspections, examinations, bedroom CCTV, and so forth, to ensure that this new provision is applied equitably).

    Hmmmmm!

    (The ‘all-encompassing anal sex’ bit – totally unrealistic, and probably not very popular with many punters – suggests that this is a ‘fake’ … though in the ‘Alice through the Looking Glass’ world of UG politics, we really can’t be too careful. Remember May 2011.)

  9. Sorry – there is another ‘startling’ feature (perhaps the most startling feature of all): the idea that that there is such a thing as a ‘consensual same-sex relationship’ is formally recognized … and this would constitute a major paradigmatic shift in thinking.

    IF this is a ‘fake’, one wonders who might have faked it. MPs who wants to keep the death penalty for consensual relations, but ‘divorce’ the measure from the sullied ‘Bahati brand’? I very much doubt that FARUG would do it – they are far too careful to do such a thing, I reckon.

  10. Thank you, ‘Maazi NCO’, for the ‘insights’ you give us. They are actually rather useful in their way.

  11. Do you, in your capacity as an opposition politico, deny that such a strategy is either being followed or under consideration?

    At the close of the 8th Parliament, I recall saying on this blog that multiple strategies will be deployed simultaneously to achieve the goal of destroying the capacity of gay sex propagandists to spread their rubbish in the public sphere in Uganda. These strategies are in clear deference to the timidity of the executive branch of the Ugandan State. So I cannot understand why this question is being asked. I said it at the time that XXXXXXXXXX will be used as template for the work and several parallel XXXXXX will occur.

  12. We’re all aware that this kind of ‘Backdoor Bahati Bill’ is a possibility, though some of us reckon the Public Order Management Bill 2011 to be the most likely vehicle for the ‘criminalization of freedom speech and/or conscience’ aspects.

    In the febrile political atmosphere in Kampala, where plots and counter-plots are everyday fare, anything is possible I suppose …

    @ ‘Maazi NCO’

    Do you, in your capacity as an opposition politico, deny that such a strategy is either being followed or under consideration?

  13. Members of Parliament Consider New Strategy to Enact Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill

    Watercooler talk as usual…..

  14. Thank you, ‘Maazi NCO’, for the ‘insights’ you give us. They are actually rather useful in their way.

  15. Do you, in your capacity as an opposition politico, deny that such a strategy is either being followed or under consideration?

    At the close of the 8th Parliament, I recall saying on this blog that multiple strategies will be deployed simultaneously to achieve the goal of destroying the capacity of gay sex propagandists to spread their rubbish in the public sphere in Uganda. These strategies are in clear deference to the timidity of the executive branch of the Ugandan State. So I cannot understand why this question is being asked. I said it at the time that XXXXXXXXXX will be used as template for the work and several parallel XXXXXX will occur.

  16. We’re all aware that this kind of ‘Backdoor Bahati Bill’ is a possibility, though some of us reckon the Public Order Management Bill 2011 to be the most likely vehicle for the ‘criminalization of freedom speech and/or conscience’ aspects.

    In the febrile political atmosphere in Kampala, where plots and counter-plots are everyday fare, anything is possible I suppose …

    @ ‘Maazi NCO’

    Do you, in your capacity as an opposition politico, deny that such a strategy is either being followed or under consideration?

Comments are closed.