British producer of gay play in Uganda released from jail on bail

British theatre producer David Cecil has been released on bail in Uganda, where he was charged over a play about the condition of gay people. He was arrested last Thursday, accused of "disobeying lawful orders", because the play The River and the Mountain was performed without authorisation.
Mr Cecil faces two years in jail if convicted. The Ugandan parliament is considering legislation aimed at increasing penalties for homosexual acts.

The play, which tells the story of a gay businessman killed by his own employees, was performed at two theatres in the Ugandan capital, Kampala, last month. Uganda's Daily Monitor newspaper reports that the Media Council had warned the play's backers not to perform it until it had been approved.
Mr Cecil was freed on bail of 500,000 shillings ($200; £124). He was ordered to surrender his passport and must report back to court on 18 October.
His lawyer John Francis Onyango told the AFP news agency that his client was in good health.
Homosexual acts are illegal in Uganda and gay people have faced physical attacks and social rejection.
An anti-gay bill imposing life sentences on those convicted of homosexual acts was re-tabled in parliament earlier this year.
It was first introduced in 2009 but never debated - and the MP backing the legislation says a clause proposing the death penalty will be dropped

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19624441 

Uganda police arrest bar owner for staging ‘gay’ play

Kampala police take action over ‘banned’ play, The River and The Mountain, which features gay plotline 07 September 2012 | By Omar Kuddus A bar owner has been arrrested in Kampala, Uganda for staging a play with a gay storyline. Police have arrested a Uganda bar owner for staging the play The River and The Mountain which features a man coming out as gay. David Cecil, owner of Tilapila Bar in Kampala was accused of showing a ‘gay themed play’. Another bar has also shown the play previously and it is been confirmed that the owner there has also been questioned by the Kampala police. But while Cecil was Ugandan, the other bar owner is an ex-pat from a western country, and therefore less likely to be harassed by police, according to activists. The River and the Mountain features a storyline about a gay businessman living in a homophobic country. The play is advertised as: ‘A Ugandan comedy drama that tackles the intersection of religion, politics and sexuality.’ It had originally been scheduled to show for the National Theatre of Uganda but performances were cancelled after government officials objected to the gay theme and regulators intervened. Some shows went ahead at two smaller venues. UK newspaper The Guardian reported that the play, by British playwright Beau Hopkins, ‘has provoked controversy not only for its sympathetic portrayal of gay people, but also because it suggests that much of the anger and hatred has been whipped up by politicians and religious leaders for their own purposes.’ It quoted Hopkins as saying: ‘The local media seem to have agreed not to talk about it, which is disappointing. We’re also particularly disappointed that it won’t be staged at the National Theatre, as there it would have reached more Ugandans.’ He said the play was not intended to promote a specific agenda, but rather to add to public debate. ‘We’re actors, not activists,’ he said. ‘The play is there to inspire discussion in the community and to get a reaction from people. We want it to open up a dialogue.’ ‘We are all disappointed but not surprised that we could not perform at the National Theatre,’ said the actor Okuyo Joel Atiku Prynce, who plays the gay character at the center of the story. ‘What is surprising is the fact that we have received no clear reason. No one is taking responsibility for this decision.’ Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), the leading LGBT campaign group in the country, told Gay Star News the play was about much more than just gay issues. A SMUG spokesperson said: ‘The gay part in the play is really very small and it tackles so many other issues, including corruption, politics and health.’ Uganda has a reputation of being a deeply homophobic society, and its parliament introduced a ‘kill the gays bill’ in October 2009. The bill proposed severe penalties, including death, for those found guilty of having same-sex relationships. While debate on the bill sometimes resurfaces, it has been temporarily shelved. Uganda gay rights activist David Kato was murdered in January 2011 shortly after a local newspaper published images of him and other gay people under a headline urging readers: ‘Hang them.’ Despite this, Uganda’s LGBT community recently held a weekend of gay pride events, including the country’s first LGBT pride march.

Uganda making life tough for NGOs, LGBT rights

I’ve interviewed hundreds of victims and witnesses of human rights abuses in Uganda, but I was genuinely surprised at the fear I heard recently when I met with activists in the country. “If you preach human rights, you are anti-development, an economic saboteur,” a colleague told me. “You aren’t going to talk about land, oil, and good governance. This is just the beginning, but the tensions have been accumulating.” Uganda has made the news in recent months over issues like the Ebola virus, Joseph Kony, and the notorious anti-homosexuality law known as the “kill the gays bill.” Less-well-known has been its longstanding patterns of torture and mistreatment of detainees by security forces. President Yoweri Museveni and the ruling National Resistance Movement have been in power for more than 25 years, with a 2005 constitutional amendment lifting presidential term limits and permitting him to run and win in 2006, and then again, heavily assisted by off-budget spending from state coffers, in 2011. Since 2011, Museveni has faced increasing criticism for economic woes, corruption, unemployment, rising HIV rates and deteriorating health and education services. In April 2011, demonstrators “walked to work” to protest raising food and fuel prices. The military and police took to the streets, using live ammunition and killing at least nine bystanders and beating journalists documenting the events. The government has routinely blocked demonstrations in the last few years, contending that they threaten public safety. The president appears to be preparing to run again in 2016 – which would be his 30th year in office – and it seems no coincidence that in the wake of growing public grievances, the ruling party’s officials are scrutinizing nongovernmental organizations and the impact they have on public perceptions of governance and management of public funds. Organizations working on human rights, land acquisitions, oil revenue transparency, and other sensitive issues are the main targets, and apparently viewed as a threat to the administration’s interests. Uganda’s laws reflect this analysis. The intelligence agencies are legally mandated to monitor civil society, and the president’s office has a role in reviewing requests to do research, via the Uganda Council on Science and Technology. Over the last two years, Ugandan officials have reportedly closed civil society meetings and workshops, reprimanded organizations for their research, demanded retractions or apologies, and confiscated t-shirts, calendars and training materials with messaging about political change and “people’s power.” The government board mandated to regulate civil society recently recommended dissolving one group unless it apologized for bringing “the person of the president into disrepute” and has stated that working in coalitions is unlawful. At the same time the government’s hostility to, and harassment of, Uganda’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community continues unabated. Government officials demonize homosexuality, deliberately misinform the public, and stir hatred. One minister uses “the promotion of homosexuality” – a spurious claim – as justification for his campaign against any group seeking to protect the rights of LGBT people. He told me that the pursuit of LGBT rights is a Western conspiracy aimed at destroying Uganda. While homosexual sex is illegal in Uganda, it is not illegal to discuss LGBT issues, despite the deeply misguided anti-gay bill still pending before parliament. Groups focused on fighting for the rights of LGBT people therefore have every legal right to register and operate. But in practice, that remains far from possible. While many interpret the government’s increasing focus on homosexuality as a populist strategy to gain support, it is still profoundly dangerous for a community that is vulnerable to harassment and violence. Donors need to ask tough questions about where Uganda is heading, given the deteriorating situation for civil society. Furthermore, in today’s Uganda, government institutions have little independence to perform their constitutionally mandated jobs, corruption is rife, and protecting the ruling party and the president from criticism has become more important than citizens’ right to information. Fundamental democratic guarantees such as freedom of expression and association should not take a back seat to security interests. Ultimately, this is the lesson of the Arab spring. Until Ugandan civil society is free to research, publish, speak out, debate and advocate for change without fear, durable security will remain out of reach. Maria Burnett is a senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch.

Uganda to clamp Internet after gay-rights hacking

Uganda vowed to tighten its Internet security after government websites were hacked earlier this week. A proposed bill that calls for the death penalty for those caught in homosexual acts has sparked outrage. Gay rights activists hacked several Ugandan government websites to denounce what they perceive to be the harassment of homosexuals in the east African nation of more than 35 million. "Message to the government of Uganda: you want to put people to death only because they have different likings," read one message posted on the website of the Uganda Law Society on Thursday. dw.de Uganda reintroduces controversial anti-gay bill A controversial bill, which calls for execution for some homosexual acts has been re-introduced in the Ugandan parliament. The timing of the bill may be just a ploy to divert attention from other issues. (08.02.2012) A Ugandan government statement said a hacker with the Twitter handle @PinkNinj4 defaced several government websites, including those of the prime minister's office, parliament, the Uganda Securities Exchange and Uganda Law Society. "Hijacking our websites and using strategies of blackmail to promote their dark agendas is unacceptable to us," said government spokesperson Karoro Okurut. On Friday, the government promised to beef up online security. "Our first priority is to apply all necessary resources to give all institutions, the tools, processes and support they require to strengthen the security of their IT systems in case of any incident," the Ugandan National Information Technology Authority said in a statement. A hacked posting on the website of prime minister Amama Mbabazi Thursday contained a fake press release announcing the prime minister's support for a gay pride parade. "We have got to expel the narrow mindedness from this country, and begin afresh, starting with a full and formal apology to all homosexuals living in Uganda today," the statement said. It was removed by Friday. "Odious" legislation Debate has raged over a controversial bill codenammed LGBTQIA (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and asexual) that initially called for the hanging of individuals convicted of same-sex sexual activity more than once. Homosexuality is already illegal in Uganda. Thirty-year-old Ugandan lesbian women Diane Bakuraira (right) and her twenty four-year-old girlfriend Angella (left) sit outside to have a drink at FARUG (Freedom and Roam Uganda) office in an undisclosed location on the outskirts of Kampala, Uganda's capital, July 30, 2010. Homosexuality is illegal in Uganda for both genders Currently before a parliamentary committee, progress on the bill seems to have stalled - but that hasn't stopped debate. Denounced as "odious" by US President Barack Obama, the proposed bill has been widely condemned outside Africa, where homosexuality is illegal in 37 countries. Obama's opposition to the bill is shared by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who earlier this month praised Ugandan gay rights activists for their bravery. "It is critical for all Ugandans - the government and citizens alike - to speak out against discrimination, harassment, and intimidation of anyone," Clinton said. "That's true no matter where they come from, what they believe, or whom they love." The bill would also mandate the death penalty for those who engage in same-sex sexual activity with a minor, or those who have HIV - the virus that causes AIDS. Few Africans are openly gay, fearing imprisonment, violence and the loss of jobs. Media often "out" people suspected of being homosexual. In 2006, Ugandan newspaper The Red Pepper published a list of the first names and professions of 45 allegedly gay men, many of whom purportedly suffered harassment as a result. In 2010 Ugandan tabloid Rolling Stone published the full names, addresses, and photographs of 100 allegedly gay Ugandans, accompanied by a call for their execution. Same-sex sexual activity among males is illegal in most African nations. Female same-sex sexual activity, however, is legal in some - such as Ghana, Sierra Leone and Zimbabwe. South Africa is the only country in Africa to legally recognize same-sex marriages. bm/ipj (AFP, Reuters)

Seeking Solutions to LGBT Discrimination in Uganda

Seeking Solutions to LGBT Discrimination in Uganda Posted by cgully on December 12, 2011 David Cameron (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons) Just over a month ago, British Prime Minister David Cameron turned a few heads by threatening to withdraw foreign aid to Uganda unless is adheres to “proper human rights” and ends bans on homosexuality. Similarly, last week the United States publicly stated its intention to use foreign aid to promote gay rights abroad with Hillary Clinton saying that “a country’s cultural or religious traditions are no excuse for discrimination.” While their intentions are laudable, the threat to withdraw aid to promote rights happily ignores continued discrimination at home, a nuanced understanding of the history of African colonization, and how to use foreign aid effectively. Time and time again we have seen that sanctions do little to influence regime change and this issue is no different. Homosexuality and other expressions of gender and sexual orientation remains one of the most divisive issues in international human rights. There has been progress toward achieving equality before the law in some countries, but even that progress is often marked by bitter social division and continued de facto inequality. As in many other areas of rights and equality, Canada has been mythologized as a champion, but reality somewhat belies the myth. Politicians continue to avoid discussing LGBT rights – the most glaring example being Toronto mayor Rob Ford’s thinly disguised rebuke of the yearly Pride Parade – and despite rhetoric of understanding and awareness raising, homophobia remains. Recent reports have shown that rates of attempted suicide among Canadians teens who self-identify as homosexual are up to four times higher than among their heterosexual counterparts due to harassment, bullying, and continued stigmatization. For our neighbours south of the border, the issue of sexual orientation remains a potentially powerful tool of divisive politics. A recent campaign ad by Republican leadership candidate Rick Perry draws a brilliantly ignorant and illogical link between President Obama’s repeal of the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy and secularism in public schools. While the video has done little but provide more carrion for the vultures who are already feasting on Perry’s long-dead campaign, the very fact that it was even created shows an appetite for homophobia among at least some proportion of the American public. Even Clinton acknowledged that it was only in 2003 that the last remaining state law criminalizing homosexual activity was abolished. All this is to say that LGBT rights in the west are relatively new, and it is something that both the law and society at large continue to struggle with. It is all the more shameful then that our leaders stand on soap boxes and threaten to cut aid to countries such as Uganda. Support for Cameron and Clinton’s remarks is coming from both sides: those who champion LGBT rights and wish to see greater awareness; and those who see foreign aid as a tool for influencing foreign governments to confirm to international norms. Neither of these camps is fundamentally wrong, but both assume that the issue can be only solved from the top down through political pressure. However that’s the kind of thinking that got us into this situation in the first place. When African heads of state argue that homosexuality is something imported from the west, they are not entirely wrong – but it is a matter of how we define homosexuality. There is evidence that same sex relationships were tolerated prior to colonization, from the boy-wives of the Kingdom of Sudan, to the “mine marriages” conducted by men working in the mines of what is now Zambia. There is even evidence of homosexual partnerships in an ancient Bushman painting from Zimbabwe. A great deal more anthropological support for same sex partnerships may have been unearthed if it weren’t for suppression of academic inquiry into the subject. Some scholars argue that while homosexuality in the west is tied to both sexual orientation and lifestyle, in traditional societies it was simply the case of having same sex intercourse, and did not necessarily involve self-identifying as something different. That is, homosexual as a label likely did not exist, and was imported by colonial powers who had codes based on archaic and outdated Abrahamic values. It is telling that the most widely cited piece of anti-homosexual legislation in Uganda is from the 1950 penal code that states “Any person who has carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature; has carnal knowledge of an animal; or permits a male person to have carnal knowledge of him or her against the order of nature, commits an offence and is liable to imprisonment for life.” This law is a remnant of a British legal system imposed during colonization to prevent what the British saw as deviant sexual behaviour. How ironic then that some 150 years later we are condemning Uganda for its outdated beliefs. These are beliefs that we, as western society, had a hand in creating. To collectively punish the people of Uganda for a system that was imposed by force from the outside, indeed a system that wiped out millennia of rich cultural development, is hypocrisy and paternalism to the extreme. This is not all to say that something must not be done. Of course those laws that are on the books must be repealed, and continued attempts to pass even harsher legislation that increases punishment for the LGBT community must be blocked. However cutting off foreign aid is not the answer. In his best-selling book “The White Man’s Burden”, William Easterly argues that foreign aid is delivered by two types of organizations, Planners and Seekers. The traditional top-down aid to government Planner approach is often subject to increased bureaucracy, corruption, and lack of focus. The Seekers, however, tackle a problem from the grassroots level, looking to see what works efficiently, effectively, and reaches those who actually need it. When Cameron and Clinton talk about cutting foreign aid to Uganda, they are doing so because they want to punish the state; they are doing so based on the Planner assumption that the state receives the aid and distributes it as it sees fit. We have seen for decades how this doesn’t work. So if the west wants to champion LGBT rights in Uganda and other African states, it would do well to work with Seekers. Give money to those non-governmental organizations who already exist on the ground, those who can affect change from the inside, from the bottom up. Give aid to the activists who risk their lives daily to protect their communities, like Freedom and Roam Uganda or Icebreakers. Such aid is difficult politically, as it does not involve large sums that sound nice at international development summits, and it can raise the ire of governments who feel they are being undermined. But if the intent is to punish, then punish by giving weapons to those who are fighting for their freedom. If we can subversively arm rebels in Libya, then we can do the same with money and resources in Uganda. It was our culture that created this system of discrimination, and so it is our responsibility to help dismantle it. But that cannot be done through threats and sanctions; it must be done through compassion, generosity, and strategic thinking. y">

ANTIHOMOSEXUALITY BILL UGANDA’S DECEMBER 2009 THE GREAT DIVIDE

Ugandan Govt a threat to LGBT Community and other NGOs

Govt is using gay issue to fight NGOs – Ssewanyana

Tuesday, 03 July 2012 23:21

Foundation for Human Rights Initiative (FHRI) is one of the NGOs that now face a threat of closure after Ethics and Integrity Minister Rev Simon Lokodo accused them of promoting homosexuality.
PATIENCE AKUMU spoke to FHRI executive director, LIVINGSTONE SSEWANYANA, on why NGOs cannot stay away from gay rights. Ssewanyana maps the way forward for ‘blacklisted’ NGOs and explains why he believes this is more than a fight against homosexuality.

Are FHRI and other NGOs that Minister Lokodo named promoting homosexuality?
We are involved in minority rights issues. We are saying that all minorities, including homosexuals, deserve respect. Uganda has an obligation to preserve the rights of every citizen. The Constitution prohibits discrimination on all grounds — as does the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights (ICPR). Uganda signed the ICPR without any reservations. This means that it must respect all its provisions.

Perhaps government is furious because you are recruiting people into homosexuality.
We are not recruiting. We do not actively encourage people to become homosexuals.

But how can you promote a right to what is already illegal under the Penal Code Act?
The Penal code needs a lot of reform. It is our duty [as civil society] to campaign for reform. We are involved in other reforms, like the campaign to restore [presidential] term limits. The law generally needs to be reformed to promote non-discrimination.
The Constitution prohibits same-sex relationships, yet at the same time says that there shall not be discrimination based on colour, race, sex, religion or other factors. Such contradiction requires reform.  The Constitution contains other contradictions. For example, it provides for the death penalty under Article 22, and then prohibits torture and inhuman degrading treatment under Article 44.  We work to reform several areas of the law.

But for now, the law upholds the death penalty and prohibits homosexuality. Shouldn’t you respect that?
We acknowledge that that is the law, but we are also saying that this law is in conflict with the Constitution. We are saying minorities deserve respect and must be defended. This is different from encouraging people from getting involved in same-sex relationships. Our duty is to defend all rights.

If NGOs are so confident that homosexuals have rights, why haven’t they approached the Constitutional Court to iron out the contradictions and declare criminalising homosexuality unconstitutional?
We cannot do everything at the same time. Currently, we are challenging the death penalty, the offence of terrorism and pushing for electoral reforms. We have to take one step at a time.

Or perhaps you too realise that Uganda is not ready to embrace homosexuals. Is that why there is so much activism, but no NGO has taken this big step?
Right now, most NGOs are focusing on the Anti-Homosexuality bill and seeing that it is not passed. If it is passed, then definitely the only solution will be to go to the Constitutional Court. We cannot challenge a law unless it is passed.

Why don’t you, in the meantime, challenge S.145 of the Penal Code for criminalising homosexuality?
The Penal Code is currently before the Law Reform Commission. They are studying it to see which aspect needs to be reviewed. We think the Penal Code is not a good area for petition right now.

One would think the two High Court decisions upholding the rights of homosexual people would give NGOs more confidence. Are you afraid of Minister Lokodo?
The courts, like us, have looked at it through the perspective of the right not to be discriminated against — not through the homosexuality perspective. The issue of homosexuality was not directly brought before court. NGOs should go ahead and defend rights in spite of political threats. We are ready to challenge [threats] before Parliament, before the citizens and, if need be, before the Constitutional Court.

The Speaker of Parliament, Rebecca Kadaga, has stated that homosexuals will never be accepted in Uganda. With the Anti-Homosexuality bill set to be debated in the House she heads, are you really not fighting a losing battle?
Kadaga, like any other person, is entitled to her views. The Anti-Homosexuality bill needs to come before the House and be debated, and all views and opinions heard. The difficult part would be for her to decide whether she wants to promote discrimination. She has to uphold the Constitution and the ICCPR.
These have non-discrimination clauses. It will do well to remember that Uganda signed the ICCPR without reservations.

Is there a legitimate reason for government to deregister NGOs? Surely, these arguments must hold some water.
I do not think there is a legitimate reason for government to deregister NGOs. The larger issue is whether Ugandans are entitled to freedom of expression, association and assembly. It’s about whether whoever wants to participate in governance issues must be registered. This issue of registration is contested. This is a broader democratic governance issue.

Are you saying this is a general attack on NGOs?
Of course, of course! I do not think it is fair for government to say that because NGOs are involved in advocating for minority rights, they should be closed. NGOs must not be partisan, but they must, by all means, be political — there is nothing in this country that is non-political.
If you want better food, better water, if you are fighting disease; all this is political. Besides, NGOs comprise individual citizens of Uganda. They have a right to monitor how their country is governed.

What place does the people’s culture and religion have in the fight for the rights of minorities?
Culture, religion, morality, values; this is the turning point of the current debate on human rights [not just homosexuals’ rights].  Societies have different value systems and religion has an important role to play. Christianity, for example, does not promote persecution. I don’t know of any religion that does.
African culture promotes tolerance and is welcoming. It is a question of individual attitudes. People have argued that the African child cannot learn unless she or he is caned. Is this true?
The Bible says, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, but the government has outlawed corporal punishment in schools. Culture and religion preach that a woman has no value, but is this true? We have to interpret culture and religion positively. Besides, the Constitution provides that any culture or religion that contradicts it is void.
At the 1993 Vienna conference on human rights, states embraced the universality of rights. Anyone interpreting rights in the cultural relativist view with the intention of undermining them will not carry the day.

Would you still defend the rights of gay people if your own child was gay?
You know, we faced the same question when campaigning for the abolition of the death penalty. Would I feel differently if it was my own relative murdered? In this struggle for human rights, we should be guided by reason rather than emotion.
If the question of emotion is not left out of the debate, then the entire human rights question will be defeated.
Again, we are not campaigning for homosexuality, but for minority rights. We are not advocating for people to get killed, or for women to become belligerent when we defend their rights; we are only defending human dignity and human rights because the Constitution says so.

Won’t NGOs cower under so much pressure?
NGOs should do the right thing. If they are fighting for rights, then they must defend rights. We must educate people on the issue [homosexuality]. We should realise that some people are short, others tall, and others fat . . . Any government worth its value will respect the rights of all citizens.
The Ugandan government should get its priorities right. Ugandans want better service delivery, better quality life; we need a better economy. Pitted against these, homosexuality is a non-issue. But government is assessing non-issues and using them to deny people their rights. We should now focus on term limits, because their absence is causing political instability.