President Yoweri Museveni has officially returned the Anti-Homosexuality Bill (2023) back to Parliament for reconsideration.
Museveni writes to MPs on issues that need fixing in anti-gay bill
By Samson Waswa
President Museveni while meeting MPs
Recommended articles
The president in a letter dated April 25, addressed to Speaker Anitah Among, raised four key issues of contention that he feels need to be fixed.
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the anti-homosexuality bill in March and sent it to the president for signing.
But with a six-month deadline ticking down and no response from the State House, concerns started swirling on whether or not the president would assent to it.
ADVERTISEMENT
It later emerged last week that Attorney General Jackson Kafuuzi, who had initially expressed support for the bill during its passing, went around to the president and asked him not to sign it until some of the concerns therein are addressed.
Among the issues raised in the President’s letter, which was read to the MPs on Wednesday, April 26, is the issue of persons who simply identify as homosexuals but don’t engage in acts of homosexuality.
The President says these should not be criminalized as proposed in Section 2 of the Bill.
Museveni also wants Clause 14 of the Bill which mandates citizens to report acts of homosexuality to police, to be removed or amended.
He also suggested that Clause 9 (which criminalizes ownership of premises where acts of homosexuality are conducted) should be removed.
ADVERTISEMENT
Below is the President’s full letter (some parts have been edited to avoid redundancy):
To Anita Among,
I have received the Anti-Homosexuality Act for assent. Some of the provisions of the bill need to be reconsidered and reviewed by parliament in the following areas:
Distinguishing between being a homosexual and actually engaging in acts of homosexuality.
It is important to recognize that the suspicion, allegation, or belief of some individuals being homosexuals has been with our society for quite some time. Indeed, the debate has always been about whether the sexuality of these individuals is deviant conduct or otherwise.
ADVERTISEMENT
What is clear is that our society doesn’t accept homosexual conduct or actions. Therefore, the proposed law should be clear so that what ought to be criminalized is not the state of one having a deviant proclivity but rather the actions of one acting on that deviance or indeed promoting the same in whatever way.
To this end, the bill should be reviewed and include a provision that clearly states especially under Sec 2 and 3 that for the avoidance of doubt, a person who is believed or alleged or suspected of being a homosexual who has not committed a sexual act with another person of the same sex does not commit an offense under those sections. This distinction must be clearly articulated in the law.
Clauses 9 (1), in my view, is unnecessary as what is provided for under 9 (2) is more comprehensive and passes the constitutional test since it provides for the actual knowledge of the person who is responsible for the premises. Clause 1 (9) should therefore be deleted from the bill.
Clause 14: Duty to Report Acts of Homosexuality:
Clause 14 as currently drafted may present constitutional challenges. Read together with Clause 15, it appears to create unnecessary contradictions and duties which will pause a challenge to implement.
ADVERTISEMENT
While Clause 14 imposes a duty of one to report suspected acts of homosexuality, Clause 15 makes it an offence for a person to make false sexual allegations. This contradiction could present challenges in the implementation of the bill and could be a source of conflict in society.
I, therefore, suggest that Clause 14 be reviewed with the aim of removing it altogether or restricting it to apply to the protection of children and vulnerable persons as provided under Article 17 (1)C of the constitution.
Rehabilitation of Homosexuals
Whereas I am of the view that the bill should include a provision that facilitates those who have been involved in acts of homosexuality, to present themselves to the relevant health or other authorities for purposes of seeking help in cases where their previous involvement in acts of homosexuality was of the aggravated kind and should not be punished; I am advised that this being a private members bill, my proposal could offend Article 93 of the constitution. This will be subsequently attended to.
In view of the above concerns, I return the bill to parliament for reconsideration under Article 91 of the constitution.
JOIN OUR PULSE COMMUNITY!
ADVERTISEMENT
Eyewitness? Submit your stories now via social or:
Email: news@pulselive.co.ke
Next story