Source: International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission
Dec 15, 2009
On December 16, 2009, the lower house of the Rwandan Parliament will hold its final debate on a draft revision of the penal code that will, for the first time, make homosexuality a crime in Rwanda. A vote on this draft code will occur before the end of the week. The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) has learned that the proposed Article 217 of the draft Penal Code Act will criminalize "[a]ny person who practices, encourages or sensitizes people of the same sex, to sexual relation or any sexual practice." If the Chamber of Deputies approves, the draft code will go before the Rwandan Senate most likely in early 2010.
Article 217 violates Rwandans' basic human rights and is contradictory to the Rwandan Constitution as well as various regional and international conventions. IGLHRC, the Coalition of African Lesbians (CAL), and Rwanda's Horizon Community Association (HOCA) will shortly issue a call to action to demand that the Rwandan Parliament withdraw this article. We urge the international community to act against this proposed law and support the equality, dignity, and privacy of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in Rwanda.
This draft provision targeting LGBT people closely follows the introduction of a similar measure in neighboring Uganda, where the nation's parliament is currently debating an Anti-Homosexuality Bill. The proposed Ugandan law would prohibit all LGBT activism and organizing, would further criminalize consensual same-sex conduct between adults, which is already illegal in Uganda, and in some cases apply the death penalty.
Meanwhile, the IGLHRC reported that Uganda's Minister of Ethics and Integrity, James Nsaba Buturo, announced that the "Anti-Homosexuality Bill will likely be altered to remove the death penalty and life imprisonment as proposed punishments for homosexuality."
"The move to amend the Bill follows months of criticism from a coalition of groups from civil society, religious, legal, and government leaders, and human rights defenders in Uganda and around the world. The Bill's main sponsor, David Bahati, countered on December 13 that Parliament would not weaken the Bill in response to international pressure, making the future of the legislation unclear."
讀者回應
'Out West' at the Autry examines the history of homosexuals and transgender people in the Old West
Museum officials say the series may be the first of its kind.
1 2 next | single page
One-Eyed Charlie was a driver for the California Stage Co. After his death, he was discovered to be a woman. (Wells Fargo / December 14, 2009)
The government and the people are two separate entities. If a few government officials pass a stupid law, how can you blame the people for it? And how can you justify that the people deserve it?
I’m saying that you should have more compassion for the general public that live under this “backwardness”, instead of saying that they deserve something they did not have a hand in creating.
Also, what makes you think that poverty isn't their priority? Just because they vote on new laws and discuss other issues doesn't mean that all of a sudden they don't care about poverty.
My best friend just came back from Rwanda & The DRC from volunteering in poor communities, and has witnessed, FIRST-HAND, the efforts of organizations AND the government in reducing poverty. Rwanda's poverty reduction program even won the UN's highest award for development. Obviously there is more that can be done - that can be said of every issue, in every country - but it’s unfair to assume that the country is not making poverty a priority just because a new law is being discussed. Is everything supposed to be put on hold until poverty is solved?
So please, get some rationality for yourself first, seriously.
less population, less angry men, more manageable country, more food as per ratio to people.
in fact, it is the pro creating heterosexuals that making africa as it is that we actually need more gays there.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/08/richard-cohen-rachel-maddow_n_385057.html
Billions of dollars of donations are supposed to reduce the HIV infection rates in these countries. But, because their own governments are nurturing stigma, their epidemic has continued to worsen. If the international community continues to pour their donations into the hands of these misguided and corrupted governments, it may be construed as an act of endorsement of these detrimental policies.
The decision-makers of international HIV-focused organisations should exercise discretion and leverage with their financial resources. They should have designed a scorecard for the potential beneficiaries of their donation to both assess how much donation to give, and encourage the latter to co-operate better by implementing constructive policies. Those governments that are objectively assessed to be the most co-operative and constructive should deserve more donations. Those that derail should be punished by having their donations curtailed. The decisions and assessments of such HIV-focused organisations should be transparent, explained and published online.
Should there be any serious violation of human rights such as the in the case of Uganda's planned gay genocide, or evidence of the corrupted governments pocketing donation money, an embargo may even be required to convey strong disapproval. This lends the opposition parties in these countries more ammunition to challenge the ruling parties. Without foreign aids, Uganda and Rwanda would have become bankrupts. If they cannot demonstrate good use of donations, then their lifeline should be cut until such time when their politicians can resolve their personal problems. If none of the political parties can, then they should be replaced via a revolution, which may be painful in the short term but good for their future.
This offers voters in Rwanda and Uganda a transparent assessment of their POLITICAL PARTIES so that they may be informed clearly as to how much aids they can expect to receive by voting in which parties to run these countries. The reasons why different parties may receive different levels of aids should also be explained. It provides the voters an additional piece of information to help them decide which party to vote for. People may vote based on different reasons, including ideologies or faiths. Economic consequence is just another factor for some voters to consider.
On the other hand, with the criteria of such a donation beneficiary's scorecard being published, the political parties are also encouraged to make their policies around what are considered good policies by the international community. For example, low corruption, independence of judiciary, fair election, respect for human rights, reduction of poverty, criminalisation of slavery and child labour, rural access to healthcare, etc. If improvements in these areas on the scorecard is identified, the government would be rewarded with more aids.
I'd even encourage prizes (with financial rewards) for those individuals who perform well in their respective capacities as Ministers, opposition leaders, volunteers or law enforcers. So, a good Minister (definitely not the Minister who proposed to execute gays!) may receive only US$2000 in salary, but US$20,000 in Prize. Beside financial gains, such individuals who make a positive difference to these poor countries earn honour which money can't buy. A Foundation akin to the Nobel Foundation and Carnegie Foundation should be established to finance this.
This Discussion Forum is a place for all of us (18 year olds with curt, seemingly irrational and emotional comments, 25 year olds with MBA-like strategic plans, and 47 year olds who've been there and done that and still intend to do more). I'm impresed by these comments and how we've emotionally, gently, perhaps irrationally and even firmly made our points. For many fridae.com members, English isn't their native language, and it can't be easy to post comments that are well-reasearched, grammatically correct, wise and scholarly.
"Lokies": you always come through with your gut-level, one-liners, and they're nice to read...I like how you participate in many fridae.com discussions....you're young and smart, and you like to be involved. And your comments definitely make me THINK and FEEL.
"Funky-fresh": you are compassionate and wise for a young man of only 21. Even though you state that you "never post comments" I'd personally like to hear from you more often here in these Discussions. You have your head on straight, and your are smart. Thank you for sharing the experiences of your friend with us...that was deeply touching.
"sunthemoon" for a young man of only 25, you should be running for high public office or running a large corporation (if you're not already). You write like an accomplished MBA, and your mind is sharp...please use your talents and your passion to change the world. I love, love, love reading your posts.
Is there anything we can do for our suffering brothers and sisters in Africa?
love,
alan
It's very hard to believe parts of the world can be so out-of-touch and so spiteful.
And I, too, really enjoyed reading funky_fresh's and sunthenmoon's comments. Very intelligently written.
If the Commonwealth can do anything there should be basic acceptance of fundamental rights - this may not mean equal age of consent or marriage rights (that comes much later in a nation's development) - but there must minimums should as not enactnig laws that criminalise human nature.
Atrocious. Absolutely atrocious.
http://www.fridae.com/newsfeatures/2009/03/17/2238.lesbians-in-south-africa-face-rising-threat-of-corrective-rape
I believe this is from ignorance and extremism in their religion whether they are Muslim or Christian.
請先登入再使用此功能。