Activists Challenge Anti-Homosexuality Law in Supreme Court
22 activists have appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn the Constitutional Court decision that upheld the Anti-Homosexuality Law. The Constitutional Court ruled in April 2024 that the law was primarily enacted to protect children and vulnerable individuals in society.
However, the activists on Thursday approached the court with voluminous documents containing evidence, grounds of appeal, and a list of authorities that they want the Supreme Court to consider and set aside the decision by the lower court.
In 2023, the Parliament of Uganda passed the Anti-Homosexuality Act following public outcry, social and broadcast media discussions, and homosexuality victims’ ‘painful and grueling stories’ of children and families that were ‘dying in silence’ from the psychological trauma of forced recruitment of children into homosexual acts. The Act criminalized homosexuality, its recognition, promotion, financing, and normalization.
However dissatisfied with the enactment of the law by Parliament, the activists filed a petition in the Constitutional Court with partial success.
But the Constitutional Court nullified Sections 3(2)(c), 9, 11(2)(d), and 14 of the Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2023, for contravening the Constitution of Uganda, 1995. The decision arose from Constitutional Petition numbers 14, 15, 16 & 85 of 2023, filed by Fox Oywelowo Odoi, Prof. Sylvia Tamale, Advocate Rutaro Robert, Bishop James Lubega Banda and 18 others Vs Attorney General, and 3 Others.
The nullified sections had criminalized the letting of premises for use for homosexual purposes, the failure by anyone to report acts of homosexuality to the Police for appropriate action, and the engagement in acts of homosexuality by anyone resulting in the other person contracting a terminal illness.
The 22 activists, including gay activists, academics from Makerere University, Members of Parliament, and Civil Society Organizations, are challenging the decision issued by a panel of five Justices of the Constitutional Court comprised of Deputy Chief Justice Richard Buteera, Geoffrey Kiryabwire, Muzamiru Mutangula Kibeedi, Monica Kalyegira Mugenyi, and Christopher Gashirabake on April 3rd, 2024.
The activists in their appeal have raised 13 grounds in which they state that the Constitutional Court erred in several key aspects, including failing to ensure meaningful public participation during the law’s enactment, contrary to Uganda’s National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy and various constitutional articles.
Others are misinterpreting the law’s financial implications, specifically, the private member’s bill that introduced the Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023, which they argue does impose a charge on public funds, contrary to Article 93 of the Constitution.
“The learned Justices of the Constitutional Court erred in law and fact when they found that the private members bill that introduced the Anti Homosexuality Act of 2023 did not impose a charge on the consolidated fund or any other public funds in contravention of Article 93..of the Constitution “, reads the appeal.
The appellants also fault the lower court for overlooking the Speaker of Parliament’s ‘irregular’ conduct during the enactment process, which they argue was inconsistent with the law.
They also accuse the Constitutional Court of incorrectly finding that the Anti-Homosexuality Law does not alter or undermine court decisions or judgments, contrary to Article 92 of the Constitution, and dismissing the Anti Homosexuality law’s violations of fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to fair hearing, equality, freedom from discrimination, privacy, profession, and health services.
It is the activist’s appeal that the Constitutional Court Justices erroneously concluded that the limitations on fundamental rights and freedoms imposed by the Anti-Homosexuality Law are justifiable in a free and democratic society.
The basis for the Constitutional Court decision was mainly the uniqueness of Uganda’s constitution which obliges courts of law to take into account the country’s social-cultural norms, values, and aspirations when resolving any disputes before them.
The fact that the Anti-Homosexuality Act is in general a reflection of the social-cultural realities of the Ugandan society and was passed by an overwhelming majority of the democratically elected representatives of the Ugandan citizens, was also among the issues the Judges considered before making their decision.
Also, the legislation and judicial decisions from sister jurisdictions that have decriminalized consensual homosexuality between adults in private spaces and the absence of a consensus at the global level regarding non-discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and sex characteristics among others.
The activists are now seeking to have the Anti-Homosexuality Act declared null and void and the Constitutional Court’s decision set aside, to pave the way for what they describe as a more inclusive and rights-respecting Uganda.
While addressing the media, the activists led by Member of Parliament Fox Odoi and Dr Adrian Jjuuko the Executive Director of Human Rights Awareness and Promotion Forum have borrowed examples from Namibia and other countries where freedoms for LGBTQI are respected saying that Uganda needs to borrow a leaf.
They are now praying that the Supreme Court gives them an expeditious fixing of this matter and a hearing date such that it’s handled as soon as possible such that their rights do not get violated further.
***URN***
Post Views: 1,011
News
Ugandan Citizen Abducted, Held in Secret Detention for Three Months, Sparks Outrage and Calls for Justice
A disturbing new case of unlawful detention has surfaced, highlighting the ongoing human rights crisis in Uganda. A Ugandan citizen was reportedly abducted and held in a secret facility, known as a “safe house,” for three months, only to be released without charge or explanation. This incident, reported by NTV Uganda, has sparked widespread condemnation and renewed calls for accountability regarding human rights abuses in the country.
While the details surrounding the abduction remain unclear, reports indicate that the individual was taken without due process and held incommunicado—an action that has long been condemned by human rights organizations. The victim’s release, with no charges filed and no clear justification, has angered activists and citizens, who view this as yet another case of egregious abuse of power by the state.
“This is a recurring pattern,” said one human rights activist. “Abductions, secret detentions, and unexplained releases have become all too common in Uganda. These acts violate fundamental human rights and erode public trust in the justice system.”
The use of “safe houses,” unregistered detention facilities reportedly operated by security forces, has been a focal point in numerous allegations of torture and illegal imprisonment. Despite repeated calls from both local and international organizations for their closure and accountability for those involved, little action has been taken to address these violations.
This case underscores the urgent need for reform within Uganda’s security apparatus and greater accountability for human rights abuses. Observers hope that drawing attention to these injustices will spur concrete action to bring those responsible to justice and ensure the protection of basic human rights.
As frustration mounts, calls for both domestic and international pressure to hold the government accountable for such crimes grow louder. “One day, there must be accountability for all these crimes against our people,” stated one social media user, reflecting the sentiments of many Ugandans.
National Unity Platform (NUP) President Robert Kyagulanyi has accused Ugandan security forces of using excessive force to disrupt a planned NUP gathering. The allegations were detailed in a statement shared on Twitter, following an event held to honor children of NUP supporters who were killed, disappeared, or detained for their political beliefs.
According to Kyagulanyi, security personnel, under the command of an officer identified as Asiimwe, carried out a preemptive operation early in the morning upon learning of the NUP’s plans. The forces allegedly stormed the premises, arrested workers, and deployed tear gas to disperse those present.
“The criminals under the command of one Asiimwe deployed early morning, arrested our workers, and threw tear gas into our premises. They’ve cordoned off the premises and blocked all people from accessing the place,” Kyagulanyi wrote.
Among those reportedly arrested were Saava Peter, Mudenya Samson, and Turyasingura Samson. Kyagulanyi claimed the detained workers were subjected to beatings and interrogated about their political affiliations, with security operatives labeling them as terrorists.
“These JATT operatives asked the workers who they support politically, branding them terrorists and criminals—their only crime being that they work with us. You can imagine the indignity!” Kyagulanyi lamented.
This incident adds to the growing tension in Uganda’s political climate, where opposition parties frequently accuse the government of stifling dissent. Despite the challenges, Kyagulanyi ended his statement with a message of defiance and optimism, proclaiming, “UGANDA WILL BE FREE.”
NUP Gathering Disrupted: Kyagulanyi Alleges Security Force Harassment and Arrests
News
Sudan Demands Apology from Uganda Over Army Chief Muhoozi Kainerugaba’s Threat to Invade Khartoum
Sudan has demanded an official apology from Uganda over “offensive and dangerous” comments made by the chief of Uganda army staff, who threated to invade Khartoum, the Sudan Tribune has reported.
General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, son of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and CDF of the Ugandan army, posted two comments on the X platform on Tuesday in which he threatened “to capture Khartoum” with the support of the US President elect Donald Trump after he takes office. The posts were deleted later.
“The government of Sudan demands and official apology from the Ugandan government for the offensive and dangerous comments of the army commander,” Sudan’s foreign ministry said in a statement that the Sudan Tribune said it has seen.
Sudan Demands Apology from Uganda Over Army Chief Muhoozi Kainerugaba’s Threat to Invade Khartoum