The High Tide is Near - I hope someone is listening!

Recently I  had the good fortune of attending a HIV and AIDS workshop where an invited activist had the following opening statements:

“I need you to know that it is for your benefit that I am here. I am not happy to be here. My presence here is a favour for you – not me.”

These words from a Key Population health and rights activist bring to the fore public health implications:

After knocking doors, certain sections of Key populations are giving up. Yet they are giving up well aware that the general public health outcomes will not be any better, in fact they will be worse off, if they are left out.

A monumental change is happening – The conversations are no longer about “we are here, we are here to stay, and we want our rights.” Rather, it is becoming, “We are here, we are here to stay but your wealth and health will be worse off, if we do not work together. We are doing you a favour in coming out.”

Unfortunately the society – lead by a political class, who would rather the public health imperatives be dictated by popular whims, has already played their trump card. The situations of violence and blackmail continue unabated. And of course there is always the criminalization card – never mind these laws remain the most outstanding evidence of lack of capacity by the African person, to bring colonial laws in sync with their public health interests. 

The message from the activist then is this – “We are here and here to stay. You have made it the worst it can be for us – for now we shall work with you BUT we know it is for your benefit. You would be most foolish to think we shall always be this generous!” 

I hope someone is listening because its either we thrive together or sink together. Granted our sinking may be more dramatic than yours – but we are all sinking regardless! I can only hope someone is listening.

Ebola In Kenya – Why it’s Not Yet Uhuru

On two separate occasions, Kenya has become subject to Ebola-stigma. In one occasion, a group of children visiting Oklahoma City in the US, faced backlash, because residents feared they would spread Ebola to their own children. On the the second occasion Parents from a British school have threatened to pull their children from school over a planned trip  to Kenya, for fear that the teachers would contract Ebola in Kenya.

“Fearbola” is a term being used to describe this (rather justified) but exaggerated fear of Ebola. Unfortunately it is also translating into stigma for entire populations – countries and increasingly continents (Africa). 

Mathematical modelling suggests that we are yet to see the worst of this pandemic  -  with some even suggesting a lot more countries including Kenya and other East African countries will have Ebola cases. After peaking Ebola cases will then being to scale back, but that will not be until after June 2015.

Yet it is not all doom and gloom. Senegal had its 1^st Ebola case reported in August 29^th, and in just under two months, on the 17^th of October, it was declared Ebola free by WHO. Nigeria too, is most likely going to get similar certification in the coming few days.

But for Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone, Ebola reproduction continues. Some are asking why these countries are unable to control their cases while Senegal and (soon) Nigeria have been able to do so. Perhaps the most important question, for us, is whether Kenya would follow the Liberia or Senegalese example were Ebola to break out here?

Unlike the West African countries where Ebola comes through road-transport migration, in Kenya it is likely to come through our Airports if direct or through road transport if any of our neighboring countries begin to report such cases.  Whatever the scenario, Kenya’s MO in such situations is shroud with secrecy – often using the epidemic as opportunities to further corrupt deal making.  But for argument’s sake let us simulate a scenario analysis:

Option A: - Best Case scenario. Our best case scenario is not to have Ebola case at all, but should we have an outbreak, government and other leaders move with speed to educate the people – on the two important response strategies of Hygiene and Social distancing. The First Lady’s beyond zero campaign, and the enormous good will she enjoys might come in handy here – and in about 60 days, Kenya would be declared Ebola free. 

Option B: Most likely scenario: Unfortunately we are a country whose leadership has consistently invested in weakening state institutions and rewarding corruption – at all levels. This is one of the main reasons why terrorism and insecurity remain such huge challenges. So while Kenyans at individual levels will invest in improving their personal hygiene, corruption will not allow the social control intervention to work – especially among the rich and political class. So Kenya will continue to experience moderated cases of Ebola – but perhaps not as bad as any of the 3 countries in West Africa. 

Option C: Worst Case Scenario: - The worst case scenario is more likely to be about how resources meant for mitigating spread of Ebola are used rather than full-scale outbreak. In this country we are lucky to have a relatively free and independent media – which means the political class will be kept on its toes – creating Scenario B above. That said, people in government will set a side huge amounts of funds for the response, while only a tiny fraction will actually go for the intended purpose.

That said, scenario B and C above, will not stop the collapse of tourism (or what remains of it), international travel (read Kenya Airways), and exports from Kenya. Kenya already has a serious social stigma attached to international terrorism (as a vulnerable country), an Ebola stigma will take a very long time to recover, and with huge economic impact. 

As the President addresses Kenya tomorrow on Mashujaa day (20th October), I hope he will give significant attention to this challenge – and call for necessary leadership to keep it off our boarders – the only really best case option.  Meanwhile one can only hope, Kenyans realize their voting considerations are not anywhere near delivering on the Uhuru (in Jaramogi sense of the word), they so crave for.

Public Health & New Vatican Approach to Gays

2014 may well go down in history as a watershed moment for the human and health rights of gay and lesbian people in Kenya and across the globe. In July 2014, the World Health Organization released consolidated guidelines on HIV prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care for key populations, which among other things identifies punitive legislative frameworks such as criminalization of gay people, (and  HIV transmission), coupled with lack of protective laws as significant barriers to access to health. The guidelines point out that decriminalization and protecting basic human rights as important critical enablers for health. The guidelines are available here  

Just this month, the Pope gathered some 200 Bishops and other Catholic leaders to discuss hot baton issues facing the family. These include divorce and remarriage but it is issues related to gay relationships that have created much furore.  This is despite the fact that of 58 paragraphs in the document, these are in only three paragraphs: 

50. Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

51. The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

52. Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority.

Paragraph 50 has since been revised to:

50.        Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community. Are we capable of providing for these people, guaranteeing [...] them [...] a place of fellowship in our communities? Oftentimes, they want to encounter a Church which offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of this, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

Some within the Church felt uncomfortable with the term “Welcoming” while others wanted the issue of religious freedom further captured in no. 52, hence the line “Nor is it acceptable that the pastor’s outlook be pressured…”was added. The full version of the report is available here.

Public Health

But why is this important for public health? Because the Church (both Catholic and Non Catholic) have been a major barrier to removal of structural dis-enablers to the health of what are referred to as Key Populations. Criminalization has been taken by some Catholic clergy, such as Cardinal Njue, who is reported to have said of those asking for decriminalization to “forget, forget and forget”; as important in protecting the African society from gays – the cost to public health not withstanding. 

One hopes then that in the new spirit of “providing for these people…” we can indeed remove the legal barriers to access with speed, so that we focus on other longer term barriers like stigma and discrimination, with the Church being an important supporter of this process.

For the lost, and adrift, Hope is the only star

Last Friday, at the UN Kenya voted against a resolution that opposed discrimination of people based on their sexuality or gender identity. Kenya did not give any reason for their negative vote, but on this issue, Kenya follows an “African-country-herd-mentality.”  That is not to say all African HRC members voted against the resolution – Burkina Faso, Congo, Namibia, and Sierra Leone abstained. Kenyan LGBT advocates had written to the foreign ministry, asking for Kenya to abstain as well – Here is their letter.

The foreign ministry, headed by Ambassador Amina Mohamed would like to tell us that she is acting in the interest of the Kenyan public. Given that Kenya criminalizes gays, it is only natural that they cannot support any measure that asks for non-discrimination. This is the WILL of the people. This brings to mind the words of philosopher John Stuart Mill – Which people?

During the confederacy war in the US, the Southern States wanted to separate from the Northern states in the confederacy because; it was “the will” of the people of the South to retain slavery unlike the northern states that had already abolished slavery.  Below the quote from Stuart Mill:

“Suppose, however, for the sake of argument, that the mere will to separate were in this case, or in any case, a sufficient ground for separation, I beg to be informed whose will? The will of any knot of men who, by fair means or foul, by usurpation, terrorism, or fraud, have got the reins of government into their hands?… Before admitting the authority of any persons, as organs of the will of the people, to dispose of the whole political existence of a country, I ask to see whether their credentials are from the whole, or only from a part. And first, it is necessary to ask, Have the slaves been consulted? Has their will been counted as any part in the estimate of collective volition? They are a part of the population.” 

So we ask - Have the Gay and Lesbian Kenyans been consulted? Has their will been counted as any part in the estimate of the collective volition? Are they a part of the Kenyan population?  

It turns out, that the gay and lesbian Kenyans had actually expressed their will to Ambassador Mohamed. They did not ask for Kenya to vote in favour of the resolution – that would be asking too much, but for the government of Kenya to abstain… Yet showing the same disdain, the slave keepers would have shown the slaves asking to be heard, Ambassador Mohamed did not even as much as acknowledge their letter to her.

Of course Ambassador Mohamed, might well say, John Stuart Mill, is no authority to quote since he supported colonization. In fact not only was he in the employ of British East India Company from 1823 to 1858.  In supporting colonization and its highhanded approach, he used particularly unsavoury words: 

“To suppose that the same international customs, and the same rules of international morality, can obtain between one civilized nation and another, and between civilized nations and barbarians, is a grave error....To characterize any conduct whatever towards a barbarous people as a violation of the law of nations, only shows that he who so speaks has never considered the subject." He also wrote that "Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians”

In fact Ambassador Mohamed might even say, Kenya voted against the non-discrimination resolution because Kenya opposes neo-colonial tendencies of the West. That it is in the interest of the Kenyan Culture and Religious sensibilities to continue to discriminate against gay and lesbian people. But I will not tire of saying this – the current climate of discrimination and criminalization of does not wash away gay and lesbian people from the Kenyan society. 

What it does is impact how they live their lives – and this has a broader public health impact not just on them but also on the super cultural and super religious heterosexual people. Ultimately eliminating structural discrimination and enacting protective structures (laws and policies), is about enlightened self-interest, it is about doing what is right for the public good!

One last word about culture – Culture does not mean “living today through the lenses of the past” but rather exercising self-agency today, using experiences of the past as an important – but only one of the source books/codes. Then again, what would I know? 

I can only hope – for hope is the guiding star for me and my kind.

Ambassador Amina Mohamed

Ambassador Amina Mohamed

Cabinet Secretary

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade

Republic of Kenya, Nairobi

Dear Ambassador,

Re: Draft Resolution at Human Rights Council on Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

We the under signed Kenyan organizations write to you in regards to the referenced draft resolution that has been presented at the Human Rights Council by Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Uruguay and is due for voting from Thursday the 25^th of September 2014.

The referenced resolution – a follow up to the Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council in July 2011 and tabled by South Africa – recalls the universality of human rights, and notes concern about acts of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It also welcomes positive developments, and requests regular reporting by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This draft resolution also hinges on the 2014 Africa Commission on Human and Peoples Rights’ Resolution against Violence on Real or Perceived Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity which we encourage Kenya to be guided by, in its international policy on this issue.

We further note with concern that in Kenya, violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity continues to be tolerated by the existence of criminal sanctions against same sex adult consensual sex in private in our Penal Code. We reference the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights 2012 report on Reproductive Rights in Kenya and the Kenya Human Rights Commission’s 2011 report ‘The Outlawed Amongst Us’ which reports allude to these and more discriminative facts substantively. We are deeply concerned by 2014 UPR shadow reports by human rights organizations in Kenya to the UN HRC which account of violence, torture, stigmatization and abuse and other forms of prejudice on real or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity in Kenya.

We ask you to appreciate the injuries to dignity and other lived effects of this discrimination to sexual and gender minorities in Kenya and their families. We recognize that when issues of discrimination against sexual orientation, gender identity and expression communities are raised, Kenya has equated them to calls for to same sex unions. We wish to emphasize that in this instance our key concern is about discrimination and its consequences and not same sex unions or marriage. This discrimination goes against the Constitutional guarantees in chapter four of the Constitution. We are encouraged  that Kenya sits in the UN Human Rights Council and therefore request that Kenya sends a clear message that human rights violations on these grounds are not acceptable – ever, and that the UN has a responsibility to address the issues in a systematic way through regular reporting.

We acknowledge that although issues of sexual orientation and gender identity are sensitive for many States, all States have agreed that no human being should face violence, torture, stigmatization and abuse. Failing to explicitly address these issues would send a negative message that violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity are not a concern for the Council. As earlier stated, there are good practices including from a resolution recently adopted by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

We note that these issues have been subject to political debate in Kenya and the African subcontinent. We encourage Kenya to enhance its international brand as a liberal democracy that protects the equal rights of its entire citizenry. A rising African democracy that champions, supports and implements pan Africanism including resolutions of AU bodies such as the ACHPR. To this end, we encourage you to support this resolution as an incremental way of helping provide a space for constructive dialogue around these important human rights issues, increase awareness of the issues and enhance the Council’s capacity to fulfil its mandate by addressing human rights issues on these grounds

Sincerely,

	Eric Gitari Executive Director National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission
	Lorna Dias GALCK Reloaded Taskforce Team Lead The Gay and Lesbian Coalition of Kenya
	Atsango Chesoni Executive Director Kenya Human Rights Commission

Cc:

H.E. Dr. John O. Kakonge

Ambassador/Permanent Representative

Permanent Mission of the Republic of Kenya

to the United Nations Office in Geneva

James Kihwaga

Minister Counsellor (Legal)

Permanent Mission of the Republic of Kenya

to the United Nations Office in Geneva

Commissioner Kagwiria Mbogori

Chairperson

Kenya National Commission on Human Rights

Nairobi, Kenya

Encl:

a)    KHRC Report

b)    KNCHR Report

c)     ACHPR Resolution

d)    UPR shadow report and attachment

e)    Draft UN Resolution