Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

#AfricaMonth: The state of LGBT rights in Africa

19 May 2021 | Story Dr Claire Westman | Photo Supplied

Dr Westman_web read more — Dr Claire Westman is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the Free State Centre for Human Rights, University of the Free State (UFS).

The socio-political and developmental health of a nation can be determined by the lived experiences of, and rights afforded to, the most marginalised within that nation. On the African continent, some of the most marginalised individuals are those belonging to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. While the health of the people of the continent has been brought into even sharper focus since the beginning of 2020 in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear that the developmental goals of the continent are threatened by the ongoing exclusion and marginalisation of, and violence against, members of the LGBT community.

Crimes perpetrated against gay, lesbian, and transgender individuals

While discrimination and violence against LGBT persons is not a new phenomenon, there have been an alarming number of murders and crimes perpetrated against gay, lesbian, and transgender individuals over the past few months. In South Africa alone, within the first two and a half months of 2021, at least six murders of LGBT individuals occurred. Similarly, studies have shown that approximately ten lesbian women are raped per week in South Africa in an attempt to ‘cure’ them of their homosexuality and to punish them for their defiance of heterosexual norms (ActionAid, 2009). Across the rest of the continent, violence and discrimination against LGBT individuals is correspondingly rife, with one recent example being the attack on the Kakuma Refugee camp in Kenya, where many displaced LGBT individuals live. This attack led to the death of one gay man and the serious injury of another.

Legislation related to LGBT rights varies across the African continent, with some countries adopting extreme forms of legal punishment, including the death penalty and lengthy prison sentences, while others, such as South Africa, constitutionally protect the rights of LGBT individuals and legally recognise same-sex marriages. A notable statistic emerging from a report compiled by The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA, 2019) shows that of Africa’s 54 countries, same-sex relations are only legal in 22 countries and are punishable by death or lengthy prison terms in countries such as Uganda, Nigeria, and Togo.

Legal responses to LGBT lives

While Africa’s legal responses to LGBT lives are often criticised by the Western world, the laws proscribing and criminalising same-sex relationships and LGBT behaviour and expressions are, in fact, one of the many lingering effects of colonialism that have been uncritically adopted within post-colonial Africa. For example, many former British colonies, such as Kenya, Uganda, Ghana, and Nigeria, continue to uphold colonial-era anti-sodomy penal codes, which punish actions ‘against the order of nature’ – that is, homosexual relationships and acts. Such penal codes were imposed in British colonies during the 19th and 20th centuries, and despite independence from Britain, many countries still enforce these penal codes and prosecute those who transgress these laws. Under the inherited British anti-sodomy laws, Kenya, as an example, prosecuted 595 people between 2010 and 2014 (Kushner, 2019). As a result of these colonial-era laws, homosexuality has misguidedly come to be recognised as un-African and a ‘threat’ to African values.

While the legal status of LGBT individuals varies from country to country, several legal instruments aim to ensure equality and to protect the rights of all individuals across the continent. Legal frameworks such as Agenda 2063: the Africa we want, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the African Charter on Democracy have been adopted and ratified by members of the African Union with the aim of guaranteeing human rights across the continent, including the rights of LGBT individuals. These frameworks explicitly use terms such as ‘all’ and ‘every human being’ to ensure inclusivity and rights for all, regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation (Izugbara et al., 2020). However, while these frameworks aspire to freedom, rights, and equality for all, there is no specific mention of the LGBT community, which leaves room for discrimination against members of this community (Izugbara et al., 2020). Similarly, while these frameworks are in place to protect the rights and equality of all citizens of the African Union, the ideals of inclusivity and equality are often not adopted or upheld by national governments.

Legal and constitutional rights

Furthermore, even where rights and protection are legally afforded to LGBT individuals by national governments, discrimination and violence persist. South Africa, for example, is praised for being progressive in the rights and protection afforded to members of the LGBT community through its Constitution; however, when viewed in the light of the ongoing violence committed against gay, lesbian, and transgender individuals, it is clear that these legal rights and protection do not extend to the social level and to the actual lived experiences of the LGBT community.

It is, therefore, important to understand the more deeply rooted reasons for this violence and discrimination. The work of Judith Butler (2004, 2020) provides one perspective on why the LGBT community is marginalised and victimised. She argues that within all societies there are certain individuals who are positioned as legitimate and grievable, while others are recognised as ungrievable and are, consequently, not considered legitimate citizens of the society. Those who are grievable, such as heterosexual white men in patriarchal societies, for example, are considered worthy of rights and protection, while those who do not conform to the logic of heteronormative patriarchy are ungrievable, and so the upholding of their rights and freedoms is denied based on the notion that they are not legitimate citizens of the nation. The lingering effects of racist, sexist, and puritanical colonial impositions, combined with the heteronormative patriarchal foundation of many African countries, have led to the LGBT community being among those considered (most) ungrievable, and therefore, (most) unworthy of rights, recognition, and freedom.

The question thus becomes – if members of the LGBT community are already marginalised and considered ungrievable and therefore not worthy of the rights and protection granted to legitimate citizens, can there be any possibility of their rights being upheld, even where these are enshrined constitutionally or through other legal instruments?

Cultural and social acceptance

While the legal and judicial systems in Africa play an important role in the ways in which LGBT individuals are treated, it is also clear that the law can only function to prevent such crimes and ensure the safety of LGBT individuals to a certain extent. The question then is, what more can be done to protect the rights, freedom, and ultimately, the lives of LGBT individuals across the continent? The obvious place to begin is with the decriminalising of same-sex relationships and the implementation of harsher punishments for those who commit hate crimes against the LGBT community, along with a more holistic approach that aims to conscientise people around LGBT issues and lives. Beyond legislation, there is a dire need for social, religious, and cultural acceptance of LGBT individuals. However, altering long-standing cultural and traditional beliefs and social constructs that marginalise and demonise LGBT individuals poses an enormous challenge, and as mentioned, cannot be done through legislation alone.

One of the ways through which cultural and social acceptance is being sought is the use of art and visual activism. In South Africa, visual activism relating to LGBT lives is seen in the work of artists such as Nicholas Hlobo, the well-known photography of Zanele Muholi, and performances by Mamela Nyamza. Across the African continent, various alternative forms of resistance and LGBT visibility are emerging through, for example, pride parades, visual and political activism, and the recognition of the existence of LGBT individuals within pre-colonial African societies. These forms of resistance challenge the notions that homosexuality is un-African and a Western import, create agency for LGBT individuals, and lead to an increased visibility of the subjective, lived experiences of these individuals. These forms of resistance, therefore, play an integral role in the acceptance and equality of LGBT individuals on a more social and cultural level.

Work to be done

Clearly, there is still much work that needs to be done legally to guarantee that LGBT individuals are afforded rights and freedoms, but it is also vital that policies and programmes are developed to aid in increasing the acceptance of LGBT individuals on a social level. Without social, cultural, and religious change, legal measures alone will not end the violence and discrimination faced by the LGBT community. Overall, lesbian, gay, and transgender individuals need to be recognised as an important and natural part of African cultures and societies so that they can be positioned as grievable, legitimate citizens who are worthy of rights. Until this happens, Africa cannot truly say that it is free from colonial impositions and ideologies.

Opinion article by Dr Claire Westman, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Free State Centre for Human Rights, University of the Free State

News Archive

Questions about racial integration in residences answered

2007-07-31

Answers to frequently asked questions about the racial integration of student residences at the UFS

1. Why does the UFS want to change the current situation in the student residences?

There are many reasons why a new approach to placement in the student residences is necessary. However, the main reason is of an educational nature. As a university, the UFS should create an environment in its residences where students can learn to appreciate and respect the rich diversity that is on offer at the university. A university accommodates students from many different backgrounds in terms of race, language, religion, economic status, culture and other aspects. If a student can learn to appreciate the value in this rich diversity at university, he or she will also be able to appreciate the value of this diversity in the workplace and broader society.

The current situation of predominantly white and predominantly black residences has not been able to cultivate such an appreciation for diversity and respect for one another as human beings, and will not equip students with the knowledge and skills required to manage diversity.

Besides this, there are many other areas of life in the residences that need attention. For one, we need to urgently establish a human rights culture in the residences so that the rights of all students can be respected. We need to address the abuse of alcohol, provide disabled students with their rightful place, and last but not least, really entrench a culture of learning in student residences.

Let us make the residences places we can be proud of – places of learning, of diversity, of respect; places of growth and development. This is the ideal we should all strive to achieve.

2. Why does the management want to force us to integrate?

It is a false argument to debate the issue in terms of “force”. Any decision by a University, or any other organisation, regarding matters of policy, rules and regulations implies a restriction on the choice of an individual and an obligation to comply. What we should focus on is whether this decision of the Council is in the best interests of our students.

The management of the university believes that it has a responsibility to give students the best education possible, not only in terms of what you learn in the lecture rooms, but especially in the residences as well. The residences can be very powerful places of learning about matters of great importance, both academic and non-academic.

The parallel-medium language policy separates students into largely white/Afrikaans and black/English classes. Efforts are being made to bridge this divide in the classroom, but we can also try to eliminate it in the residences.

The university is committed to building a new culture for the entire institution that is based on values and principles – such as an academic culture, non-racialism, respect for human rights and diversity – among staff and students.

In the context of student residences, the application of these values and principles still allows substantial room for the voluntary exercising of choice by individuals as well as by Residence Committees, notably with regard to the placement of students (they can still place 50 percent of first-year students), as well as the determination of the future character and traditions of a diverse residence.

Furthermore, students can still choose their residences (subject to availability of places), can choose a roommate, and so forth.

3. What about freedom of association?

The rights we enjoy in a democracy must be balanced against other rights, as well as the laws of the country. This means that the right to freedom of association must be balanced against laws that make it illegal to discriminate against other people on the basis of race, language or religion, for instance.

Freedom of association pertains to the right of individuals to form voluntary organisations such as clubs or private boarding houses, or their right to join or not join existing organisations. You exercise that right when you decide to become a student of the UFS, and again when you choose to live in one of its residences.

However, once you have decided to join an organisation voluntarily, you cannot subsequently demand that that organisation should provide a “club” or residence to your liking where, for instance, you only associate with your choice of co-members. You must accept the policies of that organisation.

In any case, how would that right of yours be balanced against the right of another individual who wishes to associate with a different set of co-members? (For instance – what about the freedom of a student to associate with students NOT from his own background, but indeed from another language, cultural, racial or economic background?)

The constitutional right to freedom of association can, in any case, not be used to exclude or discriminate on the basis of race or religion (Section 18 of the Bill of Rights).

Besides, the new policy guidelines will still make provision for freedom of association. This right can be exercised freely within a diverse residence with regard to friendships, joint academic work, socialising, sport, etc.

4. Will residences not lose their traditions?

The University appreciates that there are many valuable elements of tradition in residences. However, we must bear in mind that the traditions and character of student residences have evolved and changed over time, and they will continue to evolve and to change. In addition, we do not need to accept all aspects of residence life purely on the basis of tradition, including the unacceptably high level of alcohol abuse and unsavoury, humiliating and discriminatory orientation practices. The new approach to integrated residences provides the opportunity to retain the positive aspects of the current traditions and character, but also to develop new traditions and give residences a new character.

We can now establish a tradition and a character for each residence that are reconcilable with the values of the University as a place of scholarship and are aligned with the human rights approach of our country’s Constitution, the laws of our country and the strengths and diversity of the students in a particular residence.

5. Have students been involved in this process? Is there a role for them to play after the decision has been taken by the Council of the UFS?

In the first semester of 2007, during two rounds of consultations, the primes, SRC and student organisations were consulted about the proposed new placement policy to increase diversity in residences. Some residences also made written submissions on the matter (such as Madelief, Soetdoring, Wag-'n-bietjie, Vergeet-my-nie, Emily Hobhouse). Other residences requested and were granted more time, but did not make any submissions in the end (such as Reitz and Armentum).

Management also had several meetings with the above-mentioned structures to hear first-hand from students their concerns and solutions regarding possible challenges presented by integration in residences.

During these interactions, several excellent ideas and proposals were put forward by students. These views had a definite impact on the eventual proposal that was taken to the University Council, in particular regarding the minimum level of diversity (30%) in junior residences and the fact that residences still want to have a say in the placement of students, rather than the placement decision being left in the hands of Management alone (hence the 50% placement portion of residences). Management values the effort that was put into the process by the primes and residence committees, and thanks them for their contributions.

However, it should be stressed that consultation should not be understood as a process of negotiation, nor does it imply that consensus must be reached. What it means is that Management must take a considered decision after hearing the views of stakeholders.

Management would like students to continue to provide input and ideas regarding the implementation details of the policy guidelines. Task teams have been established and students will be informed about how they can interact with the task teams on an ongoing basis.

6. But integration in the residences was tried in the past (in the late 1990s), and then it failed. Why will it work now?

Yes, the University of the Free State did integrate its residences as far back as 1993, and for a few years it worked. The UFS did it at that time and is now doing so again, because it is the right thing to do. Yet it is important to understand why the previous attempt at racial integration in residences was not successful.

Firstly, both black and white students were much polarised because of the apartheid past. Secondly, there was insufficient management support for students in the residences, the student leaders generally as well as residence heads, in terms of dealing with diversity and related issues. Thirdly, the institutional culture of the UFS and the residences in particular was not addressed as part of broader transformation and integration in residences, whereas it is now being addressed.

In addition, the current decision to integrate residences has the benefit of being implemented after several more years of integration in schooling, sport, workplaces and other aspects of life.

This decision is also based on Management’s commitment to give all the possible support it can to this process.

This is a very important initiative that the UFS is undertaking. Management, in co-operation with students, must ensure that it succeeds. Integrated residences that produce high-quality graduates equipped to deal with the challenges of the workplace and our society is a worthwhile ideal we should all strive to achieve.

If you would like to make a proposal regarding the implementation and practical aspects of the new policy, please send it to the following email address: rector@ufs.ac.za

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept