This is the kind of thing the anti-gay agenda speaks out FOR.
A fact, I have lived with my man, the man I love, for 8 good years. I hope to go on living with him for as long as I draw breath. Of course we make love. We do have sex, as frequently, as hotly as we can. Why not.
This is what the kind of thing which the Nigerian Legislative assemblies want to criminalise. My act of making love is criminal, in Nigeria, as well as in Uganda. But, because they cannot break down my door and arrest me, catch me red handed as the law requires, they want to use other means. Check out the quotes I am picking from the article below.
any of our friends who knows that we live together would be subject to punishment. For knowing that my lover and I have lived together all this long, in love and harmony. They have ‘aided and abetted’ our love.
Our friends would actually have tougher jail terms than me. For aiding and abetting me and my lover.
The definition for gay marriage is “as gay people living together”. So, there you are. A new definition. Just living together. Not having sex. Not caught kissing. Gay people are plain not supposed to ‘live together’
Any gay organisation is criminal. Period. Told you once that gug is a criminal, didn’t I?
I cannot look with any respect to religious figures who support this sort of invasion of my privacy. In the name of ‘god’, ‘family’, etc they see my love as an attack on them. I am the charitable one here when I look them in the eye and declare that I truly despise them. They hate me. They want me in prison, in the name of love. Yes they do. And in the most hypocritical of ways declare they are full of love for me. Pharisees.
Check out the statements of support from Church and Church related groups for this invasion of the privacy of any gay Nigerian.
This is the kind of draconian thing the Scott Lively, Ssempa, Nsaba-Buturo and Langa are after. Bet you Nsaba Buturo is anxiously picking up points. A new law is soon coming for gay Ugandans.
Now, my lover is telling me that my dinner is getting cold. He loves me. And he does care about this stupid legislation, coming up in Nigeria. It will occur in Uganda, soon. But for now it isn’t. And my dinner is getting cold. So, let me put aside my ire and anger and enjoy the love that I have with my companion and love. At least, for now, I can enjoy it.
Nigerian gay rights activists have told the country's lawmakers that a new bill to outlaw same sex marriage would lead to widespread human rights abuses. The new law would mean prison sentences for gay people who live together, and anyone who "aids and abets" them. The plea by activists was made to a public committee of the National Assembly which is discussing the bill.
It is already illegal to have gay sex in Nigeria but the new law would extend police powers to arrest suspects. "This bill is not necessary, we see no reason why people should be criminalised," Rashidi Williams, 23, of the Queer Alliance of Nigeria told the committee. "I did not choose to be gay. It is trial enough to live in this country, we should not create more laws to make us suffer," he said. Under the new law anyone who has "entered into a same gender marriage contract" would be liable to be jailed for three years. The bill defines a same sex marriage as gay people living together.
If you are not careful and allow the institution of the family to break down, the consequences will be on all of us Mayor Eze Nigerian National Assembly member
Anyone who "witnesses, abet and aids the solemnization" of a same gender marriage would face five years in prison, or a fine. Activists say the law does not make sense because anyone who aides and abets people to live together would face a tougher sentence than the couple concerned.
The law would make it easier for the police to arrest suspects, and criminalise anyone working in a human rights organisation that dealt with gay rights, they say.
Church groups spoke in favour of the bill, saying that gay marriage risked "tearing the fabric of society". "In the Bible it says homosexuals are criminals," Pius Akubo of the Daughters of Sarah church told lawmakers. Rev Patrick Alumake told the National Assembly the top leadership of the Catholic church in Nigeria supported the bill wholeheartedly. "There are wild, weird, ways of life that are affecting our own culture very negatively, we have people who either by way of the media or travelling around the world have allowed new ideas which are harmful to our nation and our belief," he said.
The bill's sponsor, House of Representatives member Mayor Eze, said the bill was necessary to protect the family. "If you are not careful and allow the family institution to break down, and the consequences will be on all of us," he said.
Children wearing T-shirts that said "Same sex marriage is un-natural and un-African", and "same sex marriage is an abomination" stood in the aisles of the committee room. Ekaette Ettang, of the Daughters of Sarah church who provided the T-shirts, denied they were inciting hatred against homosexuals. "We don't hate gay people, but this is the public's opinion and we have the right to speak," she said.
Activists say gay people in Nigeria face violence from their families and neighbours every day. Two years ago, a woman went into hiding in the northern KanoState after reports that she had organised a wedding for four women - which she strongly denied. Also that year 18 men were arrested in the northern city of Bauchi and accused of participating in a "gay wedding". A Sharia court dismissed the charges and they were charged with the lesser offence of vagrancy.
Gay rights activists and lawyers who have worked on LGBT human rights cases met in South Africa last week.
The four-day workshop on legal strategies for promoting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in Africa was attended by 45 participants from 11 countries— Botswana, Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe.
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC), Global Rights, Interights and the Kenyan Section of the International Commission of Jurists were among those taking part.
It was the first meeting between lawyers who have worked on litigation related to LGBT rights and African LGBT leaders.
Participants reviewed key pieces of litigation to document lessons learned.
These cases included an unsuccessful challenge to Botswana's sodomy laws in 2003 (Kanane v. Botswana), the prosecutions of 11 gay men in Cameroon in 2006, the arrests of two women in Rwanda on charges related to sexual orientation in 2008, and the ongoing trial of 18 young men in Northern Nigerian on charges of cross-dressing and homosexuality.
A high point of the meeting was the discussion of Ooyo and Mukasa v. Attorney General of Uganda, a case settled in December 2008, in which two transgender activists successfully challenged the unconstitutional invasion of their home and their mistreatment by local police and elected officials. One of the litigants, as well as the lead counsel, key donors, and local organizers from Uganda were present at the meeting.
Lawyers, activist leaders and donors attending the meeting acknowledged the importance of impact litigation for repealing sodomy laws and challenging other discriminatory statutes and policies.
Such litigation however needs to be situated within the context of local, national and regional LGBT groups.
Participants discussed the need for security for lawyers defending LGBT clients and causes. Many of the lawyers at the meeting had faced attacks on their reputations, attempts at disbarment, and even physical violence.
The event concluded with a call to create a multi-faceted LGBT legal fund for Africa and a training and support network for African lawyers working on sexual rights cases.
Interesting. In a bid to justify the 'banning of gay marriage', the Nigerian parliament is doing what it once tried to do before. Mounting a broad assault on the human rights of those who are gay or perceived to be gay. The perception is the key, to wipe out this menace.
A common theme of this kind of legislation. The sin, of homosexuality is perceived to be so bad that a whole range of provisions and assaults on basic human rights is mounted, in the name of prosecuting homosexuals. Happened in Uganda, continues to happen...
and now, in Nigeria again.
If this bill passes, I will be liable to prosecution in Nigeria for living with my lover- whether or not the Nigerian police can confirm that I have had homosexual relationships with him. (well, the point is not that I have sex whenever I can damn make it...! It is that the govt in this case is demanding that just the 'suspicion' of me being gay, living in a gay relationship, is enough to condemn me to prison.
Bill Would Assault Rights of All, Reinforce Punishment for Homosexual Conduct
January 26, 2009
This bill masquerades as a law on marriage, but in fact it violates the privacy of anyone even suspected of an intimate relationship with a person of the same sex. It also threatens basic freedoms by punishing human rights defenders who speak out for unpopular causes.
Georgette Gagnon, Africa director at Human Rights Watch
(New York) - A bill before Nigeria's National Assembly to ban "same gender marriage" would expand Nigeria's already draconian punishments for homosexual conduct and threaten all Nigerians' rights to privacy, free expression, and association, Human Rights Watch said today.
In a letter to President Umaru Yar'Adua, leaders of the House of Representatives and Senate, the Nigerian National Human Rights Commission, and other national, regional, and international bodies, the group urged legislators and the president to reject the bill. The letter urged the country's leaders to combat an environment of stigma and violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Nigerians.
On January 15, 2009, the Nigerian House of Representatives voted favorably on the second reading of a bill "to prohibit marriage between persons of same gender." The bill would punish people of the same sex who live together "as husband and wife or for other purposes of same sexual relationship" with up to three years of imprisonment. Anyone who "witnesses, abet[s] and aids" such a relationship could be imprisoned for up to five years.
"This bill masquerades as a law on marriage, but in fact it violates the privacy of anyone even suspected of an intimate relationship with a person of the same sex," said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "It also threatens basic freedoms by punishing human rights defenders who speak out for unpopular causes."
The House of Representatives referred the bill to its committees on Human Rights, Justice, and Women Affairs, which will hold a joint public hearing on it. If the House approves the bill on a third reading, it must then be approved by the Senate and President Yar'Adua.
Members of the House of Representatives reportedly justified the bill by citing links between "sodomy" and HIV and AIDS, making clear that they see the marriage ban as a deterrent to homosexual conduct, though research shows that HIV is most-often spread through heterosexual conduct in Nigeria. Article 214 of the Nigerian Criminal Code Act already provides up to 14 years of imprisonment for anyone who "has carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature." As Human Rights Watch documented in a December 2008 report, this law is a Victorian-era provision that remained after the end of British colonial rule.
The proposed law contravenes several provisions of regional and international human rights standards. Article 2 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights promises every individual equal entitlement to rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind; article 3 of the charter guarantees all individuals equality before the law; and article 26 states that: "Every individual shall have the duty to respect and consider his fellow beings without discrimination and to maintain relations aimed at promoting, safeguarding and reinforcing mutual respect and tolerance."
The United Nations Human Rights Committee, which authoritatively interprets the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and evaluates states' compliance with its provisions, found in the 1994 case of Toonen v. Australia that laws criminalizing consensual, adult homosexual conduct violate the covenant's protections for privacy and against discrimination. Nigeria acceded to the covenant without reservations in 1993.
In its letter, Human Rights Watch pointed to grave human rights issues raised by the proposed law:
* The evident intent of the new bill is to extend the already-existing penalties for homosexual conduct.
* Criminalizing "living together as husband and wife" further expands these punishments. They would no longer be limited to sexual acts between people of the same sex, but would potentially include mere cohabitation or any suspected "intimate relationship" between members of the same sex. Far less evidence would be needed for conviction, and prejudice and suspicion would be a basis for arrests. This threatens all Nigerians' right to private life.
* The proposed five-year sentence for those who "abet" a same-sex relationship is greater than the punishment stipulated in the bill for those who enter into a "same gender marriage." This provision could be used to punish anyone who gives any help or advice to a suspected "same gender" couple - anyone who rents them an apartment, tells them their rights, or approves of their relationships. Advocates, civil society organizations, and human rights defenders would be ready targets.
* Under the bill's provisions, anyone - whether Nigerian or foreign - who enters into a "same gender marriage," or simply has a "same gender relationship" in another country and wishes to continue it in Nigeria, could be subject to criminal penalties when they set foot on Nigerian soil. This provides the state with even broader powers to invade people's privacy.
Similar concerns were raised in a joint public statement issued by the Nigerian Bar Association Human Rights Institute, Nigerian nongovernmental organizations, and Amnesty International.
In 2006, Nigeria's minister of justice proposed a similar bill, seeking to criminalize not only same-sex unions but also public advocacy and associations supporting the rights of lesbian and gay people. Sixteen human rights groups - from Nigeria, across Africa, and around the world - had condemned the bill for violating the freedoms of expression, association, and assembly guaranteed by international law as well as the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, and for further jeopardizing the fight against the HIV and AIDS epidemic in the country. That legislation failed to come to a vote in the National Assembly.
Nigeria has the world's third-largest population of people living with AIDS. Data collected by international health organizations suggests that 80 percent of HIV infections in Nigeria result from heterosexual sex, which discredits the equation between "sodomy" and AIDS as drawn by the members of the House of Representatives. The proposed bill would further hinder HIV and AIDS education and prevention efforts in the country by driving some groups affected by the epidemic further underground for fear of violence. In July 2008, the UNAIDS (Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS) country report on Nigeria recognized that criminalization of vulnerable populations, including men who have sex with men, makes HIV and AIDS prevention and treatment efforts less accessible to these populations.
Violence against LGBT people is frequent in Nigeria. In September 2008, several national newspapers published articles criticizing a Christian church in Lagos that ministers to LGBT people: the articles included names, addresses, and photographs of members of the congregation and the church's pastor. Police harassment and threats forced the church to shut down and the pastor to flee the country. Some members of the congregation lost their jobs and homes and had to go into hiding, and several of them continue to be under threat of physical harm and harassment.
"This legislation would allow the state to invade people's homes and bedrooms and investigate their private lives, and it would criminalize the work of human rights defenders," said Gagnon. "It is not a ban on marriage, but an assault on basic rights."
