Ghanaian lawmakers on Friday approved a bill that would, among other things, criminalize LGBTQ+ allyship.

Reuters reported MPs approved the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, in a voice vote after parliament’s Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee backed it.

MPs in 2024 approved a similar bill, but it faced legal challenges and then-President Nana Akufo-Addo didn’t sign it. Lawmakers last year reintroduced the measure after President John Dramani Mahama took office.

The bill awaits his signature.

Rightify Ghana, a Ghanaian LGBTQ+ advocacy group, in a series of social media posts notes MPs passed the bill days before the 4th African Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Family Values and Sovereignty will take place in Accra, the country’s capital.

Kenya’s High Court has ruled the country’s government cannot refuse requests to amend gender markers on birth certificates and other ID documents.

Audrey Mbugua, a prominent transgender activist, and two other people in 2020 sued Attorney General Dorcas Oduor, the Registrar of Births and Deaths, the National Registration Bureau, and Immigration Services Director General Evelyn Cheluget after they did not receive amended birth certificates.

The Washington Blade previously reported the three plaintiffs argued documents that do not correspond with their gender identity “has denied them opportunities and rights.” Oduor, for her part, in response to the plaintiffs’ claims argued “a person’s gender is based on fact — not feelings — and the plaintiffs at birth were registered and named based on their gender status.”

High Court Justice Bahati Mwamuye ruled on May 20.

“The silence and delay cannot defeat rights,” ruled the court, according to the Daily Nation, a Kenyan newspaper. “Constitutional rights cannot be delayed over administrative convenience.”

The court in 2014 ordered the Kenya National Examinations Council to change Mbugua’s name on her academic diplomas and to remove the male gender marker from them.

Kenya’s intersex rights law took effect in 2022. The government in February 2025 announced intersex people can receive birth certificates with an “I” gender marker.

The Daily Nation notes Mwamuye ordered the Registrar of Deaths and Births and other government agencies to “begin receiving and considering applications for gender-marker changes within” 60 days.

“Access to legal identity documentation is not just a human rights issue; it is a foundational pillar of socio-economic inclusion,” said the Initiative for Equality and Non-Discrimination, a Kenyan advocacy group, in response to the ruling. Without accurate IDs or passports, individuals face severe barriers to employment, financial systems, global business travel, and participation in governance and democratic processes.”

“This ruling marks a critical step forward in reducing administrative discrimination and fostering an inclusive environment where every Kenyan citizen’s legal identity aligns with their dignity,” added INEND.

Outright International, a New York-based global LGBTQ+ and intersex advocacy group, in a statement described Mwamuye’s ruling as “a meaningful shift towards aligning Kenya’s legal framework with constitutional guarantees of equality, privacy, and human dignity. Outright International also applauded Mbugua and other activists who fought for this change.

“Today, we celebrate a milestone — one achieved through resilience, solidarity, and an unwavering belief in justice,” said the group. “Outright International stands with transgender and intersex Kenyans in honoring this victory and reaffirming our commitment to advancing rights, recognition, and equality for all.” 

There is a dangerous silence surrounding intersex lives in Ghana — a silence shaped by fear, misinformation, cultural misunderstanding, and institutional neglect. Today, amid discussions around the possible passage of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, that silence risks becoming law, reinforcing exclusion and deepening the marginalization of already invisible lives. 

Much of the national debate surrounding the bill has focused on LGBTQ+ identities. Yet buried within it are implications for intersex persons that many Ghanaians do not fully understand because intersex realities remain largely invisible. 

Intersex persons are born with natural variations in chromosomes, hormones, reproductive anatomy, and/or genital characteristics that do not fit typical definitions of male or female bodies. Intersex is not a sexual orientation or gender identity. It is a biological reality. Ghana’s Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) has clearly acknowledged this distinction. 

Despite this distinction, the bill mistakenly collapses intersex realities into a legal framework linked to LGBTQ+ criminalization. 

Although the bill contains only limited references to intersex persons, under certain medical exceptions, these references do not amount to recognition or protection. Instead, they frame intersex bodies as abnormalities requiring regulation, correction, and institutional management. This approach is inconsistent not only with Ghana’s constitutional guarantees of dignity, equality, privacy, and liberty, but also with emerging African and international human rights standards. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights Resolution on the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Intersex Persons in Africa – ACHPR/Res.552 (LXXIV) 2023 affirms protections relating to bodily integrity, dignity, freedom from discrimination, and against harmful medical practices. Additionally, the United Nations has repeatedly condemned medically unnecessary and non-consensual interventions on intersex children. Rather than affirming the humanity and autonomy of intersex persons, the bill risks legitimizing systems of surveillance, coercion, violence, and institutional erasure. 

This is not protection.

It is managed erasure.

A child born intersex in Ghana already enters a society shaped by secrecy and stigma. Families are often pressured to hide intersex children or seek “correction” to make their bodies conform to social expectations. 

The bill risks intensifying this pressure.

Clause 17 creates space for “approved service providers” to support interventions relating to intersex persons, yet offers little protection around informed consent, bodily autonomy, confidentiality, or coercive treatment. Under the language of “correction” or “support,” harmful interventions may become normalized.

The intersex community has documented painful lived experiences of intersex Ghanaians that reveal the devastating consequences of stigma and invisibility. 

One heartbreaking case involved intersex twins born in Ghana’s Eastern Region in 1993, who were repeatedly forced to move from village to village because of rejection and ridicule. After losing their father, their main source of protection and support, they became even more vulnerable and reportedly experienced severe emotional distress, including suicidal thoughts linked to years of stigma and exclusion. This is what invisibility looks like in practice. 

Another painful example is the story of Ativor Holali, whose lived experience exposed the cruel realities intersex persons face in sports and public life. Ativor Holali endured invasive scrutiny, public humiliation, and social suspicion because her body did not conform to rigid expectations of femininity. Rather than being protected as a Ghanaian athlete deserving dignity and privacy, she became the subject of speculation, gossip, and institutional discomfort.

Her experience reflects a broader social crisis: when society insists that every body must fit a narrow binary definition, intersex people are forced to defend their humanity in spaces where dignity should already be guaranteed.

Intersex Persons Society Of Ghana (IPSOG)’s Ŋusẽdodo research further revealed that approximately 70 percent of intersex respondents reported depression, anxiety, trauma, or severe emotional distress linked to medical mistreatment, family rejection, bullying, and social exclusion.

The bill risks transforming these existing prejudices into institutional policy. Several provisions risk deepening surveillance, restricting advocacy, weakening confidentiality, and discouraging public education around intersex realities. Intersex-led organizations providing healthcare guidance, legal referrals, psychosocial support, and community services may face serious challenges.

This places IPSOG and other intersex-led organizations in Ghana at serious risk.

For many intersex Ghanaians, these spaces are not political luxuries.

They are survival mechanisms.

Governments derive legitimacy by protecting the natural rights of all persons, including dignity, liberty, bodily autonomy, and freedom from arbitrary interference. The bill raises concerns because it risks weakening these protections for intersex persons through surveillance, coercive interventions, and restrictions on advocacy.

Ghana’s Constitution declares that “the dignity of all persons shall be inviolable.” Articles 15, 17, 18, and 21 specifically protect dignity, equality, privacy, expression, and freedom of association. These protections should apply equally to intersex persons. 

Intersex persons are not threats to Ghanaian culture.

Intersex children are not moral dangers.

Intersex bodies are not political weapons.

They are human beings deserving dignity, healthcare, safety, and constitutional protection. 

The true measure of a democracy is how it protects those most vulnerable to exclusion. At this moment, Ghana faces a choice: deepen fear and silence, or uphold dignity, bodily autonomy, and constitutional freedom for intersex persons. 

History will remember the choice we make.

Fafali Delight Akortsu is the founder and president of the Intersex Persons Society of Ghana (IPSOG).

There is something deeply unsettling about a society that turns a child’s future into a public referendum. In Eswatini, there were reports that students were expelled from school over alleged same-sex relationships, and that parents were invited to vote on whether those children should remain, forcing us to confront a difficult question on when did education stop being a right and become a favor granted by collective approval? Because this is a non-neutral vote.

A vote reflects power, prejudice and personal beliefs, which are often linked to tradition, culture, politics and religion. It is shaped by fear, by stigma, by long-standing narratives about morality and belonging. To ask parents, many of whom may already hold hostile views about LGBTIQ+ people, to decide the fate of children is not consultation. It is deferring the responsibility and repercussion. It is placing the lives of young people in the hands of those most likely to deny them protection.

And where is the law in all of this?

The Kingdom of Eswatini is not operating in a vacuum. It has a constitution that guarantees the promotion and protection of fundamental rights, including equality before the law, equal protection of the laws, and the right to dignity. The constitution further goes on to protect the rights of the child, including that a child shall not be subjected to abuse, torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.  

The Children’s Protection and Welfare Act of 2012 extends the constitution and international human rights instruments, standards and protocols on the protection, welfare, care and maintenance of children in Eswatini. The Children’s Protection and Welfare Act of 2012 promotes nondiscrimination of any child in Eswatini and says that every child must have psychosocial and mental well-being and be protected from any form of harm. The acts of this very instance place the six students prone to harm and violence. The expulsion goes against one of the mandates of this act, which stipulates that access to education is fundamental to development, therefore, taking students out of school and denying them education contradicts the law.  

Eswatini is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. These are not just commitments made to make our governments look good and appeasing. They are obligations. The Convention on the Rights of the Child is clear regarding all actions concerning children. The best interests of the child MUST be a primary consideration and NOT secondary one. According to the CRC, as indicated in the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.” It is not something to be weighed against public discomfort and popularity.

The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child reinforces this, grounding rights in non-discrimination (Article 3), privacy (Article 10) and protection from all forms of torture (Article 16). Access to education (Article 11) within these frameworks is not conditional but is a foundational right. It is not something that can be taken away because a child is perceived as falling outside social norms and threatening the moral fabric of society. It is a foundational right and determines one’s ability to participate in civic actions with dignity.

So again, where is the law when children are being expelled?

It is tempting to say the law is silent but that would be too generous. The law is not silent rather, it is being ignored and bypassed in favor of systems of decision-making that make those in power comfortable. When schools and their leadership defer to parental votes rather than legal standards, they are not acting neutrally. Expelling a child from school because of allegations is not a decision to be taken lightly. It disrupts education and limits future opportunities and for children already navigating identity and social pressure, this kind of exclusion can have profound psychological effects. It isolates them. It marks them for potential harm. Imagine being a child whose future is discussed in a room where people debate your worth. That is exposure. That is harm. There is a tendency to justify these actions in the language of culture, tradition, religion and protecting social cohesion. But culture is not static and the practice of Ubuntu values is not an excuse to violate rights. If anything, the principle of Ubuntu demands the opposite of what is happening here.

Ubuntu is not about conformity. It is about recognition and is the understanding that our humanity is bound up in one another. That we are diminished when others are excluded. That care, dignity, respect and compassion are not optional extras but central to how we exist together. Where, then, is Ubuntu in a school where some children are deemed unworthy of access to education?

Why are those entrusted with protecting children are failing to do so?

There is a very loud contradiction at play. On one hand, there is a claim to shared values and to the importance of community. On the other hand, there is a willingness to isolate and exclude those who do not fit within the narrow definition of what is acceptable. You cannot have both. A community that thrives on exclusion is neither cohesive nor safe.

It is worth asking why these decisions are being made in this way. Why not follow the established legal processes? Why not ensure that any disciplinary action within schools aligns with national and international obligations? Why introduce a vote at all? The answer is uncomfortable and lies in legitimacy and accountability. A vote creates the appearance of a collective agreement. But again, I reiterate, it distributes responsibility across many hands, making it hard to hold anyone accountable. It allows the school leadership to say “lesi sincumo sebantfu”(“This is what the community decided, not me”) rather than confronting their own role in human rights violations. If the law is clear and rights, responsibilities and obligations are established, then the question is not what the community feels. The question is why those entrusted with protecting children are failing to do so.

There is also a deeper issue here about whose rights are seen as negotiable. When we talk about children, we often speak of care, of understanding, of protection and safeguarding them because they are the future. But that language becomes selective when it intersects with sexuality, particularly when it involves LGBTIQ+ identities. Suddenly, care, understanding, protection, and safeguarding give way to punishment.

Easy decisions are not always just ones.

If the kingdom is serious about its commitments under its constitution, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, then those commitments must be visible in practice, not just in policy documents. Rather, they must guide decision-making in schools and in communities. That means recognizing that a child’s right to education cannot be overridden by a show of hands. It means ensuring that schools remain spaces of inclusion rather than sites of moral policing. It means holding leaders and institutions accountable when they fail to protect those in their care.

Bradley Fortuin is a consultant at the Southern Africa Litigation Center and a human rights activist.

Kenyan President William Ruto is facing backlash for backing U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order that recognizes only two genders: Male and female.

Ruto’s support for Trump’s decision to ban transgender people from serving in the U.S. military and competing on women’s sports teams has drawn criticism from human rights defenders, lawmakers, lawyers, and intersex activists.

Ruto’s critics cite Kenya’s 2022 landmark decision to officially recognize intersex people as the third gender with an “I” gender marker after years of court battles for recognition and their inclusion in a national Census for the first time in 2019.

“We are very proud that contrary to what has been happening in the past, this year we got some very welcoming developments in the United States that as a leading democracy, we have gotten to understand that the policy direction of the U.S. supports what we believe in,” Ruto stated during a Jan. 26 speech at the Global Cathedral Church’s annual convention in Nairobi. “Boys must remain boys, men must remain men, women must remain women and girls must remain girls.”

Ruto’s position to side with Trump on sex and gender identity contradicts his previous stance during the Biden-Harris administration when he was cautious about speaking about transgender and queer rights in order not to jeopardize his relationship with Washington.

Trump on Jan. 21 signed an executive order that directed the U.S. federal government to only recognize male and female genders. This directive revoked the Biden-era policy that recognized trans rights and allowed trans servicemembers.

Trump on Feb. 6 signed another executive order that bans trans athletes from competing on female sports teams

“The war on women’s sports is over,” he said.   

“We’re putting every school receiving taxpayer dollars on notice that if you let men take over women’s sports teams or invade your locker rooms, you will be investigated for violations of Title IX and risk your federal funding,” Trump warned. “From now on, women’s sports will be only for women.”

His executive order relies partly on the U.S. Justice Department’s authority to bring enforcement actions under Title IX, which bars sex discrimination in education and requires schools to offer girls an equal opportunity to play sports. The law, under Trump’s interpretation, forbids trans girls from playing in girls’ sports.

Trump in 2017 banned trans people from serving openly in the U.S. military.

“We thank God that this year the first very news from the U.S. in the new administration is to confirm what the Bible says, what our faith believes in, and what our tradition firmly is grounded on,” Ruto said in his speech.

The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR), a government-funded body, described Ruto’s comments as “embarrassing and unfortunate.”

“In Kenya, the law is very clear and the Children’s Act recognizes the intersex because they are unique persons as they have no issues based on sex identity or gender orientation,” said an intersex rights activist who asked the Washington Blade to remain anonymous. “His sentiments are likely to increase stigma against the intersex persons and if they are discriminated against, anyone will just go to court because they are also protected by the law.”

Esther Passaris, an opposition MP who represents Nairobi County, maintained there are not two sexes in Kenya.

“Let’s face it, we have intersex children with two or incomplete sexes. These children require our love as a society,” she said. “Let God deal with the genders.”

Since the recognition of intersex people, several policy measures to tackle discrimination have been implemented to ensure their protection and equal treatment. 

Kenya last week officially recognized intersex people at birth, allowing them to receive birth certificates with an “I” gender marker. The KNCHR described this decision as “a historic milestone” that aligns with the Kenyan constitution and other existing policy measures that include the Children Act and the proposed Intersex Persons Bill, 2024.

“This is a major step towards securing rights, dignity, and equal opportunities for all intersex persons in Kenya,” KNCHR stated.

KNCHR asked Kenyans, state, and non-state institutions to support awareness, policy reforms, and the inclusion of intersex people for the latest reform to be implemented successfully.

As mpox cases continue to surge in Uganda, LGBTQ+ rights organizations have raised concerns over its “troubling increase” among the queer community and have advised it to be on high alert.  

The Uganda Key Populations Consortium, an LGBTQ+ rights organization, working closely with the Health Ministry and Kampala Capital City Authority and other government bodies to stem the spread of mpox, has warned that queer people in semi-urban areas are the most affected.   

“These communities have expressed valid concerns regarding stigma and discrimination which may deter individuals from seeking necessary medical attention,” UKPC Director General Richard Lusimbo said.  

Uganda has recorded 512 new mpox cases in the last two weeks, bringing the total number of cases to 2,127 and 12 deaths, as the Health Ministry confirmed on Tuesday. The World Health Organization’s latest multi-country report on the mpox outbreak, released on Jan. 11, indicates that Uganda has recorded 1,552 cases and 12 deaths since the disease was first reported last July..      

The WHO report places the capital Kampala with the highest number of mpox diseases spread through community transmission with an infection incidence of 45 cases per 100,000 people, followed by the Wakiso and Nakasongola districts.

“Cases have been reported in at least 49 percent (71 out of 146) of districts in the country, but the epidemic remains largely concentrated in and around Kampala,” the WHO report reads. “So far, only clade Ib MPXV, linked to the outbreak in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, has been detected in the country, and current evidence indicates that transmission of the virus is occurring exclusively through close, physical human-to-human contact.” 

People between 20-29 are the most affected group, with sexual contact as a major mode of transmission among sex workers and men who have sex with men.

The UKPC has issued an urgent health advisory to the queer community as it collaborates with the Health Ministry and KCCA in responding to the mpox transmission through immediate and long-term actions, including integrating its response with ongoing HIV prevention and care strategies. 

Lusimbo, whose organization has also partnered with WHO and the Most At Risk Populations Initiative, a local health NGO, to stem the spread of mpox stated a unified preventive approach that is inclusive and effective is vital for the health and safety of all Ugandans.   

“The fear of stigma and discrimination can exacerbate the situation by hindering effective response and treatment efforts,” Lusimbo said. 

He noted that the fight against mpox in Uganda is not just limited to managing a health crisis. It also offers the queer community an opportunity to advocate for the rights and dignity of the marginalized groups. 

The UKPC last week unveiled an online survey on the mpox epidemic targeting queer people in Uganda to reliably understand its impact on them and their knowledge about the disease. 

“Mpox continues to disproportionately affect mostly our community, especially female sex workers and their clients, and men who have sex with men,” the survey reads. “As the national secretariat and coordinating body for key populations, UKPC, in partnership with KCCA, has been leading important discussions on the disease’s public health implications in areas where the impact is most notable.”

The report states the survey data will help develop tailored, inclusive, and equitable interventions for the LGBTQ+ community. The survey also seeks to provide specific numbers of queer people who have contracted mpox and those who have died from the disease.

Uganda Minority Shelters Consortium Coordinator John Grace attributed the lack of data about queer people affected by mpox to privacy concerns, stigma, and discrimination against the community by the homophobic public and state authorities tasked with enforcing anti-homosexuality laws. He said the Anti-Homosexuality Law has created a significant barrier for queer people to report such abuses.

“This makes it difficult to ascertain the true extent of stigma and discrimination or the impact of misinformation about transmission methods,” Grace said.  

Grace also noted the collaboration between LGBTQ+ organizations and healthcare providers in tackling mpox has been “inconsistent.” 

“While some providers have been welcoming and supportive, others demonstrate a lack of awareness or sensitivity regarding the specific needs of the LGBTQ+ community,” he said.

Despite the homophobic climate in Uganda amid the fight against mpox, Grace noted many LGBTQ+ organizations have proactively disseminated accurate information to educate queer people about the disease’s prevention within their communities through educational campaigns and safer sex practices.   

Advocacy groups in Ghana have welcomed the demise of a bill that would have further criminalized LGBTQ+ people and outlawed allyship.

President John Mahama on Jan. 14 said the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill that MP Sam George of Ningo-Prampram co-sponsored in 2021 was essentially dead. Mahama made the remarks to a delegation of bishops from the Ghana Catholic Bishop’s Conference.

“If we are teaching our values in schools, we wouldn’t need to pass a bill to enforce family values,” said Mahama. “More than just passing the Family Values Bill, we need to agree on a curriculum that instills these values in our children as they grow.”

The president also said that although MPs passed the bill last February, parliament dissolved before former President Nana Akufo-Ado, whose term ended earlier this month, signed it.

“I don’t know what the promoters of the bill intend to do, but I think we should have a conversation about it again,” said Mahama. “As far as I know, the bill did not get to the president. So, the convention is that all bills that are not assented to law before the expiration of the life of parliament, expire. So that bill effectively is dead.”

LGBT+ Rights Ghana Communications Director Berinyuy Burinyuy said the president’s remarks offer a glimmer of hope for LGBTQ+ Ghanaians who have long been subjected to systemic discrimination, fear, and violence.

“For many, the mere suggestion that LGBT+ issues could be addressed through education rather than criminalization represents a significant departure from the traditional legislative path championed by the bill’s proponents,” said Burinyuy. “This shift implies a possible opening for dialogue and a more inclusive approach, one that recognizes the need for respect and understanding of diverse sexual identities within Ghanaian society.”

Burinyuy, however, asked about how family values will be incorporated into the educational curriculum.

“Will the curriculum provide a comprehensive, nuanced understanding of human sexuality that respects diversity, or will it risk reinforcing discriminatory attitudes under the guise of cultural preservation?” said Burinyuy. “The fear, particularly among LGBT+ activists is that the emphasis on education could inadvertently foster homophobia in Ghanaian children. If the content is not carefully structured, it could perpetuate harmful stereotypes and deepen existing prejudices.”

“While Mahama may not yet be fully committing to a clear policy direction, his statement leaves open the possibility of a more balanced approach, one that allows for a national conversation on sexual rights without rushing into divisive legislation,” added Burinyuy.

We Are All Ghana said Mahama’s comments are a welcomed approach in addressing anti-LGBTQ+ sentiments and negative stereotyping.

“We need a holistic educational curriculum for our schools,” said We Are All Ghana. “The children at least deserve to know the truth. There is nothing worse than half baked information.”

Yaw Mensah, an LGBTQ+ activist, said Mahama is teaching Ghanaians to be tolerant of everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation.

“Mahama is indirectly saying LGBT persons are not Ghana’s problems. Let’s teach families values that accept and respect everyone. Ghanaian values should be tolerance, respect, honesty, hardworking, hospitality, and integrity,” said Mensah. “Those need to be taught and not the hate, discrimination, barbarism, greediness, and hypocrisy that we are seeing in many leaders which transcends into the young ones.”

George has yet to comment on Mensah’s comments about his bill.

Ugandan Foreign Affairs Minister Henry Oryem has revealed U.S. and EU sanctions over the country’s Anti-Homosexuality Act and other human rights violations have pushed Kampala to join the BRICS bloc.

Oryem noted Western powers’ decision to sanction other countries without U.N. input is against international norms, and Uganda needed to shield itself from such actions by aligning with the bloc that includes China, Russia, India, South Africa, Brazil, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, Iran, and Indonesia. (Consensual same-sex sexual relations remain criminalized in the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Ethiopia. Iran is among the countries in which consensual same-sex sexual relations remain punishable by death.)

Kampala officially became a BRICS member on Jan. 1, joining eight other countries whose applications for admission were approved last October during the bloc’s 16^th annual summit in Kazan, Russia.  

“The United States and European Union, whenever they impose sanctions, expect all those other countries to make sure they abide by those sanctions and if you don’t, you face penalties or even they sanction you,” Oryem said. 

Oryem spoke before parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday.

MPs asked him to explain the circumstances that led Uganda to join BRICS and the country’s financial obligation from the membership.      

“Now because of that and the recent events, you have realized that the United States and European Union have started freezing assets of countries in their nations without UN resolutions which is a breach of international world order,” Oryem said. “Uganda can’t just standby and look at these changes and not be part of these changes. It will not be right.”

Oryem also said President Yoweri Museveni’s Cabinet discussed and approved the matter before he directed the Foreign Affairs Ministry to write to the BRICS Secretariat about admitting Uganda into the bloc.

The U.S. and other Western governments condemned Museveni’s decision to sign the Anti-Homosexuality Act, and announced a series of sanctions against Kampala. 

Washington, for example, imposed visa restrictions on government officials who championed the Anti-Homosexuality Act, re-evaluated its foreign aid and investment engagement with Uganda, including the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and reviewed Kampala’s duty-free trade with the U.S. under the African Growth and Opportunity Act for sub-Saharan African countries.

The U.S. in May 2024 imposed sanctions on House Speaker Anita Among and four other senior Ugandan government officials accused of corruption and significant human rights violations.

Although the EU criticized the enactment of the Anti-Homosexuality Act, the 27-member bloc did not sanction Kampala, despite pressure from queer rights activists. The state-funded Uganda Human Rights Commission and several other human rights groups and queer activists, meanwhile, continue to pressure the government to withdraw implementation of the law.

UHRC Chair Mariam Wangadya, who called on the government to decriminalize homosexuality last month, has said her commission has received reports that indicate security officers who enforce the Anti-Homosexuality Act have subjected marginalized communities to discrimination and inhuman and degrading treatment

“As a signatory to several international and regional human rights conventions, Uganda is committed to ensuring non-discrimination and equality before the law,” Wangadya said.  “At the domestic level, Uganda’s constitution, under Article 21, prohibits discrimination based on gender, ensuring equality before the law, regardless of sex, race, ethnicity, or social status.”

Museveni’s son comes out against Anti-Homosexuality Act

Museveni’s son, Army Chief General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, has also emerged as a critic of the Anti-Homosexuality Act.

“I was totally shocked and very hurt. Japanese are warriors like us. I respect them very much. I asked them how we were oppressing them. Then they told me about the AHA,” he said on X on Jan. 3 while talking about how the Japanese questioned him over Uganda’s persecution of queer people during his recent visit to Tokyo. “Compatriots, let’s get rid of that small law. Our friends around the world are misunderstanding us.”

Kainerugaba, who is positioning himself as Museveni’s successor, had already declared an interest in running for president in 2026 before he withdrew last September in favor of his 80-year-old father who has been in power for more than three decades.

In his X post, Kainerugaba also indicated that “we shall remove this Anti-Homosexuality Act in 2026.” He left the platform six days later after his posts threatened Uganda’s diplomatic relations.

“They (gays) are sick people, but since the Creator made them … what do we do? Even ‘kiboko’ (whips) might not work. We shall pray for them,” Kainerugaba said. 

The Supreme Court is currently considering a case that challenges the Anti-Homosexuality Act. The Constitutional Court last April upheld the law.

A prominent LGBTQ+ activist in Cameroon is facing terrorism charges.

Alice Nkom, a human rights lawyer and board president of Réseau des Défenseurs des Droits Humains en Afrique Centrale, a group known by the acronym Redhac that translates to Human Rights Defenders Network in Central Africa, on Jan. 2 received a summons from Cameroon’s National Gendarmerie, or national military intelligence.

The summons follows a complaint that Lilian Engoulou, general coordinator of the Observatory for Societal Development, filed.

Engoulou has accused Nkom of attempting to endanger state security, financing terrorism, and funding separatist groups in the northwest and southwest regions of the country that are fighting for independence from Cameroon.

Nkom in recent months has been vocal over the human rights situation in the country, including LGBTQ+ rights.

Territorial Administration Minister Paul Atanga Nji last month suspended Redhac and sealed the organization’s offices for alleged illegal and exorbitant funding and lack of compliance with government regulations on how NGOs should be run.

Nkom, however, removed the seals. This action prompted authorities in Littoral province where Redhoc’s offices are located to issue the summons on Dec. 19 after she did not appear.

Nkom has described the summons as a political witch hunt, stating she doesn’t acknowledge the Observatory for Societal Development. Nkom added she broke the seals because authorities placed them illegally.

“At the beginning of the year, a new summons, this time issued by the police, at the request of the military court, with accusations of financing terrorism, following the complaint of an association that I ignore from its existence, its leaders, or even the date of its creation,” she said.

“Human rights defenders are small, fragile but courageous, against the authoritarian and totalitarian drift of a state,” added Nkom. “Like the dikes facing the rising tide of injustice, they stand there firm, despite their vulnerability. I am an advocate, a human rights defender, a humanist. Humanity cannot be divided into categories. We are one, all connected by the same dignity.”

Maurice Kamto, a fierce critic of President Paul Biya who is a lawyer and leads the opposition Cameroon Renaissance Movement political party, said Nkom should not face judicial and political harassment. Kamto offered to represent her pro bono.

“She is an eminent figure in the public life of our country,” said Kamto. “She is fighting many battles. We do not share all these battles, and it is not all her battles that are at issue today.”

Kamto further described Nkom as “an important voice in the public arena of our country.”

“It is therefore, unacceptable that she should be the object of the judicial and political harassment that the authorities are currently inflicting on her,” said Kamto. “We cannot stand by and watch this happen.”

Consensual same-sex sexual relations are criminalized under Section 347 of Cameroon’s penal code with up to five years in prison. A 2010 law states whoever uses electronic communication devices to make “a sexual proposal to a person of the same sex” faces up to two years in prison.

A number of Cameroonians in recent years have been arrested — and tortured — for engaging in same-sex sexual relations.

A Human Rights Watch report notes Cameroonian security forces between February and April 2021 arrested at least 27 people, including a child, for alleged consensual same-sex conduct or gender nonconformity. Some of those arrested were beaten.

Biya’s daughter, Brenda Biya, last year posted an image to her Instagram page of her kissing her ex-girlfriend, Layyons Valença, and saying her wish was for them to live in peace as a couple. Brenda Biya deleted the post after it sparked controversy in Cameroon.

Nkom is expected to appear before the National Gendarmerie on Jan. 14, which is also her 80th Birthday.

The Ghanaian Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed challenges to a bill that would further criminalize LGBTQ+ people and penalize allyship.

Lawmakers on Feb. 28 approved the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill. Two lawyers, Amanda Odoi and Richard Sky, challenged it.

Outgoing President Nana Akufo-Addo had previously said he would not sign the bill into law until the Supreme Court issued its ruling. His successor, President-elect John Dramani Mahama, will take office on Jan. 7.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Dec. 10 honored Ebenezer Peegah, executive director of Rightify Ghana, a Ghanaian LGBTQ+ advocacy group, and six other human rights activists from around the world during a ceremony at the State Department.

Blinken noted the pending Supreme Court ruling — and discrimination and violence that LGBTQ+ Ghanaians continue to face — before he presented Peegah with the Secretary of State’s Human Rights Defender Award.

“In Ghana, vigilante groups use social media platforms to organize mobs to attack LGBTQI+ people, as well as to entrap, to blackmail, to harass them,” said Blinken. “As these attacks increase, Ghana’s Supreme Court is considering legislation that would criminalize people for identifying as LGBTQI+, as well as threaten Ghanaians’ constitutionally protected freedoms of speech, press, and assembly.”