Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
31 May 2023 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo Charl Devenish
UFS Federation of African Law Students Panel Discussion
The passing of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill in Uganda has raised concerns about human rights violations.

Uganda recently passed its Anti-Homosexuality Bill into law, sparking condemnation from the international community. This development coincides with the continent commemorating Africa Month as is customary in May.

The timing of Uganda’s signing of the anti-gay bill into law on the 60th anniversary of the African Union (AU) raises concerns about the contradiction between the AU's objective of promoting unity, nation-building, and freedom from discrimination and the enactment of legislation that violates these principles. It highlights the ongoing struggle to achieve equality and respect for the rights of all individuals, including those in the LGBTQ+ community, across the African continent.

Contravening intercontinental conventions

As a member of the AU, various international human rights treaties and instruments have been signed and approved by Uganda, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the African Charter on Human and People's Rights. These instruments promote equality, non-discrimination, and the protection of human rights for all individuals. The passing of such legislation contradicts the country's commitments to these international agreements.

LGBTQ+ intolerance is widespread in several other African nations. For instance, 32 of the 54 African nations forbid same-sex relationships. In fact, the death sentence is still applied to homosexuality in some nations. This includes Mauritania, Somalia, and a few Nigerian states that adhere to Sharia law. Homosexuality is a crime in Kenya, where the maximum sentence for incarceration is 14 years. It carries a minimum sentence of 13 years and a maximum of life imprisonment in Tanzania as well. Although there are anti-gay attitudes in many African nations, Uganda has gone too far by drafting legislation that is so reprehensible that it grossly violates human rights.

Providing an academic magnifying glass

On 24 May 2023, the University of the Free State (UFS) chapter of the Federation of African Law Students (FALAS), in collaboration with the Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, hosted a panel discussion on the Bloemfontein Campus, based on the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

Leading the panel discussion were UFS experts such as Prof John Mubangizi, who is the former Dean of the Faculty of Law and current Research Professor in the Free State Centre for Human Rights; Prof Mikateko Mathebula, Associate Professor in the Centre for Development Support; Khanya Motshabi, Senior Lecturer in Advanced Human Rights; as well as Akhona Komeni, Peer Mentor Supervisor at Free State Rainbow Seeds.

Factors contributing to anti-gay sentiments

Prof Mubangizi presented a summary of an article he recently submitted for publication in a scientific journal, titled: Uganda’s unrelenting opprobrious legislative efforts to criminalise same-sex relations: implications on human rights.

By way of introduction, Prof Mubangizi highlighted a few possible reasons for anti-gay sentiments in Uganda. “Firstly, many Ugandans are deeply religious and hold traditional beliefs that view homosexuality as immoral, unnatural, and contrary to the will of God – these beliefs are enforced by conservative interpretations of religious texts that condemn homosexuality. The second reason is political opportunism – some politicians in Uganda are using anti-gay sentiments to rally support and divert attention from other issues. Thirdly, there is a general lack of information about what homosexuality is.”

Human rights implications

FALAS Chairperson, Ntsako Khoza, said the organisation believes that the bill is a gross violation of human rights. “The student group opposes this legislation and is adamant that it unfairly discriminates against the LGBTQ+ population and is therefore backwards for society. Promoting good governance, respect for human rights, peace, and justice in Africa is the objective of our organisation,” he said.

It is important to note that the condemnation expressed by FALAS and the international community at large is based on the recognition that laws criminalising same-sex relationships are a violation of human rights and contribute to discrimination and persecution. Upholding human rights, promoting good governance, and fostering respect for all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation, is crucial for building inclusive and just societies.

News Archive

CR Swart Memorial Lecture: Mr Cecil le Fleur
2006-08-08

Khoe and San call for government to speed up policy dialogue with indigenous communities  

 Mr Cecil le Fleur, leader of the National Khoe-San Consultative Conference and member of the executive management of the National Khoe-San Council, has called for a national policy on indigenous peoples to protect the human rights and special needs of indigenous people in South Africa.

 Mr Le Fleur delivered the 38th CR Swart Memorial Lecture on the Khoe and San at the University of the Free State (UFS).  He commended the UFS for its serious approach to the Khoe and San and for initiating initiatives such as a research project on the Griqua in which various aspects linked to language, -culture, -history, - leadership, their role in the South African community (past and present) and the conservation of their historical cultural heritages will be covered.   

 “The policy dialogue with indigenous communities initiated by government in 1999 and supported by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), has been exceedingly slow, owing to political and bureaucratic problems,” said Mr Le Fleur.

 According to Mr Le Fleur the slow pace is also impacting negatively on the United Nations’ efforts to expand the international standards and mechanisms for human rights so as to include the special needs of indigenous peoples.

 “The successful adoption of a South African policy would probably have a major impact on the human rights culture of Africa and, more specifically, on the UN system,” he said.

 “South Africa has a powerful moral authority internationally and is willing to use this authority in multilateral forums. At this stage, however, South Africa’s Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) may not take an official position on UN instruments and declarations pertaining to indigenous issues, until the Cabinet has resolved its own domestic policy position,” he said. 

 According to Mr le Fleur it therefore came as a great surprise when the DFA brought out a positive vote in the UN for the adoption of the "Draft Declaration on the Rights of indigenous Peoples" in June this year, even before the completion of the policy process. 

 Policy consolidation in South Africa is the primary key to creating a new policy climate in Africa in order to protect the rights of indigenous peoples.  “The existing constitution of the Republic of South Africa is one of the most liberal on the continent, and embraces the concept of redress of past discrimination.  It already includes a clause (Section 6) making provision for the protection of language rights for Khoe and San peoples - the fist peoples of southern Africa,” he said. 

 “If South Africa can effectively integrate this ‘third generation’ of collective rights within an existing democratic constitution, this will send a clear message to Africa and the world that indigenous rights are a necessary component of human and civil rights in modern democracies,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur proposed an institutional framework based on set principles that would satisfy the needs and aspirations of the Griqua and other first indigenous peoples in South Africa.  “The proposed framework was based on the notion of vulnerability as a result of colonialism and apartheid, which stripped us of our indigenous identity, cultural identity and pride as people.  This injustice can hardly be addressed within the existing mechanisms provided by the current text of the Constitution,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur also proposed that the principles of unique first-nation status, as recognised in international law, should be applied in the construction of the framework of the constitutional accommodation for the Khoe and San. 

 Mr Le Fleur further proposed that the Khoe and San’s indigenous status in constitutional terms must be separate from the constitutional acknowledgement of their status as a cultural community, as envisaged in sections 185 and 186 of the Constitution of 1996.

 According to Mr Le Fleur, the suggested mechanism should make provision for structures such as:

  •  A statutory representative council for First Indigenous Peoples of South Africa at a national level;
  • a separate Joint Standing Committee on Indigenous and Traditional Affairs, in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces on which the Khoe and San can be represented;
  • a representative structure for the Khoe and San in the legislature of each relevant province; and
  • ex officio membership in the relevant structures of local government.

Media release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Media Representative
Tel:   (051) 401-2584
Cell:  083 645 2454
E-mail:  loaderl.stg@mail.uovs.ac.za 
24 August 2006


- Full lecture
- Photo gallery
 

 

 

 

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