Anti-Homosexuality Act 

______________

Parties to the anti-gay law case have opted for written submissions from which the court will give its verdict.

Usually, the court gives parties the option to either make spirited oral submissions in court or comprehensive written submissions before giving its verdict.

The lawyers were tight-lipped on why they opted for written submissions in a very sensitive topic that has put Uganda in the spotlight.

The parties alongside their lawyers on Tuesday appeared before a panel of five justices led by Deputy Chief Justice Richard Buteera.

Other Justices are Geoffrey Kiryabwire, Muzamiru Kibeedi, Christopher Gashirabake and Monica Mugenyi.

The Judges allowed the parties to give evidence by way of written submissions.

Subsequently, the Judges announced that they will deliver their verdict on notice in a petition filed by activities to challenge the Anti-homosexuality law.

Among the petitioners is Human rights advocate Nicholas Opiyo, West Budama MP Fox Odoi, Makerere University law professors Sylvia Tamala and Kabumba Businye, Veteran Journalist Andrew Mwenda and several civil society organisations.

The petition is against the Attorney General, the chief legal advisor to Government, born-again pastor Martin Ssempa of Makerere Full Gospel Church and the Family Life Network.

Submissions

In their submissions, the petitioners are asking court to throw out the Anti-homosexual law because they say it infringes on the rights and freedoms including speech and association of gay people.

The petitioners argue that the process of enacting the Ant-Homosexuality Act, 2023 without meaningful and adequate public participation was inconsistent with and in contravention of Articles 1, 2, 8A, 20, 36, 38, 79 and objective II (1) of the National Objectives and Directive Principles of the State Policy of the constitution.

Court documents indicate that the conduct of the Speaker of the 11th Parliament, Anita Annet Among during the second and third readings of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, 2023, on March 21 and May 2, this year, amounted to bias and is inconsistent with and in contravention of Article 89(1) and (2) of the constitution.

They state that sections 1, 2, 3 and 6 of the Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2023, in criminalising consensual same-sex sexual activity among adults in private, are inconsistent with and in contravention of the right to equality and non-discrimination guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 (1) and (2) of the Constitution.

“Section 4 of the Anti-Sexuality Act, 2023, in providing for criminal liability of every child below 18 years is inconsistent with and in contravention of the rights of the child guaranteed under Articles 20, 34, 45, 8A and 287,” reads part of the petition.

The petitioners further assert that sections 9 and 11(1) and (2)(d) of the Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2023, by making it an offence for any person to allow and or lease or sub-lease premises to be used for purposes of homosexuality or “activities that encourage homosexuality,” is consistent with and in contravention of the principle of legality guaranteed under Articles 20,28(12) and 44(c) of the Constitution

However, in his defence, the Attorney General, represented by director of civil litigation Martin Mwambustya, wants court to maintain the Anti-homosexuality law because there is a need to re-emphasize that same-sex sex is a crime.

The Attorney General and Pr Martin Ssempa of Makerere Community Church, contend that due to ethical and moral reasons, the current law prohibiting same-sex marriages and its severe punishments consented to by President Yoweri Museveni in May, this year, should be saved.

The law imposes capital punishment for some behaviour including having gay sex when HIV positive, and stipulates a 20-year sentence for “promoting” homosexuality.