Will criminalising HIV spread help in fight against virus?
Dec 06, 2009
IN April this year, Johnson Aziga, a Ugandan living in Canada was found guilty of murdering his two sexual partners by infecting them with HIV, a virus that causes AIDS.
By Chris Kiwawulo
IN April this year, Johnson Aziga, a Ugandan living in Canada was found guilty of murdering his two sexual partners by infecting them with HIV, a virus that causes AIDS.
Court convicted Aziga, 52, on two counts of first-degree murder, 10 counts of aggravated sexual assault and one of attempted aggravated sexual assault. He had no choice but to face a mandatory life sentence.
In Switzerland, this year, a man was jailed for infecting his girlfriend with HIV, yet he was unaware of his status. In Texas, USA, a court recently sentenced a man living with HIV to 35 years in prison for spitting at a police officer, although the chances of the officer getting the virus were negligible.
Such laws are normal to the developed world and the trend is growing in Africa, where the HIV prevalence rate is high. For instance in West Africa, 12 countries recently passed HIV laws.
In Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Mali and Niger, a woman can be criminally charged with not taking the necessary steps to prevent HIV transmission to her unborn baby.
In Uganda, the HIV Prevention and Control Bill 2008, which criminalises the spread of the virus has been tabled before parliament. It criminalises (with death sentence) the intentional or willful transmission of the virus.
But even before it is enacted into law, courts have already started passing sentences to people who willfully spread the virus. A court in Uganda recently jailed a man for 14 years for having sex with a mentally ill 19-year-old-girl and infecting her with HIV/AIDS.
The proposed legislation also requires HIV-positive people to reveal their status to their sexual partners and allows medical personnel to reveal someone’s status to their partner.
Women have been cited to lack the power to insist on condom use or faithfulness by their partners, so it is believed such laws will protect them.
But HIV activists argue that applying criminal law to HIV transmission will achieve neither criminal justice nor curb the spread of the virus. Instead, it will increase discrimination against people living with HIV and undermine public health and human rights.
AIDS activists have slammed the proposed new law, arguing that it will discourage people from testing for HIV, hence hindering efforts of prevention.
Stella Kentutsi, the programme manager at the National Forum of PHLA Networks in Uganda, says medical practitioners have no way of knowing how one’s sexual partner might react and should, therefore, not be permitted to reveal an infected person’s HIV status.
Dr. David Kihumuro Apuuli, The Uganda AIDS Commission chief says some sections of the bill need to be revised, citing the provision that seeks HIV status mandatory disclosure for couples planning to marry.
“We have to think about the repercussions of this in a male-dominated society,†he says, noting that many women were afraid of their husbands’ reactions once they revealed their status.
UNAIDS, the UN agency dealing with the fight against HIV, warns that using criminal laws in cases other than intentional transmission could create distrust between medical workers and patients.
It has urged governments to limit criminalisation to cases where a person knows he or she is HIV-positive and acts with the intention to transmit the virus. The reality is that intentional acts of HIV transmission are rare, so in most instances, criminal prosecutions are not appropriately applied.
Alternatives
AIDS activists recommend that instead of applying criminal law to HIV transmission, governments should expand programmes proven to have reduced HIV infection.
A UNAIDS policy brief released in August 2008 urges governments to enact and enforce laws that protect women from sexual violence and discrimination as a more effective way of protecting them from HIV.
IN April this year, Johnson Aziga, a Ugandan living in Canada was found guilty of murdering his two sexual partners by infecting them with HIV, a virus that causes AIDS.
Court convicted Aziga, 52, on two counts of first-degree murder, 10 counts of aggravated sexual assault and one of attempted aggravated sexual assault. He had no choice but to face a mandatory life sentence.
In Switzerland, this year, a man was jailed for infecting his girlfriend with HIV, yet he was unaware of his status. In Texas, USA, a court recently sentenced a man living with HIV to 35 years in prison for spitting at a police officer, although the chances of the officer getting the virus were negligible.
Such laws are normal to the developed world and the trend is growing in Africa, where the HIV prevalence rate is high. For instance in West Africa, 12 countries recently passed HIV laws.
In Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, Mali and Niger, a woman can be criminally charged with not taking the necessary steps to prevent HIV transmission to her unborn baby.
In Uganda, the HIV Prevention and Control Bill 2008, which criminalises the spread of the virus has been tabled before parliament. It criminalises (with death sentence) the intentional or willful transmission of the virus.
But even before it is enacted into law, courts have already started passing sentences to people who willfully spread the virus. A court in Uganda recently jailed a man for 14 years for having sex with a mentally ill 19-year-old-girl and infecting her with HIV/AIDS.
The proposed legislation also requires HIV-positive people to reveal their status to their sexual partners and allows medical personnel to reveal someone’s status to their partner.
Women have been cited to lack the power to insist on condom use or faithfulness by their partners, so it is believed such laws will protect them.
But HIV activists argue that applying criminal law to HIV transmission will achieve neither criminal justice nor curb the spread of the virus. Instead, it will increase discrimination against people living with HIV and undermine public health and human rights.
AIDS activists have slammed the proposed new law, arguing that it will discourage people from testing for HIV, hence hindering efforts of prevention.
Stella Kentutsi, the programme manager at the National Forum of PHLA Networks in Uganda, says medical practitioners have no way of knowing how one’s sexual partner might react and should, therefore, not be permitted to reveal an infected person’s HIV status.
Dr. David Kihumuro Apuuli, The Uganda AIDS Commission chief says some sections of the bill need to be revised, citing the provision that seeks HIV status mandatory disclosure for couples planning to marry.
“We have to think about the repercussions of this in a male-dominated society,†he says, noting that many women were afraid of their husbands’ reactions once they revealed their status.
UNAIDS, the UN agency dealing with the fight against HIV, warns that using criminal laws in cases other than intentional transmission could create distrust between medical workers and patients.
It has urged governments to limit criminalisation to cases where a person knows he or she is HIV-positive and acts with the intention to transmit the virus. The reality is that intentional acts of HIV transmission are rare, so in most instances, criminal prosecutions are not appropriately applied.
Alternatives
AIDS activists recommend that instead of applying criminal law to HIV transmission, governments should expand programmes proven to have reduced HIV infection.
A UNAIDS policy brief released in August 2008 urges governments to enact and enforce laws that protect women from sexual violence and discrimination as a more effective way of protecting them from HIV.