ReportWire

Tag: Stephanie Musho

  • To Attain the SDGs, We Must End Female Genital Mutilation

    To Attain the SDGs, We Must End Female Genital Mutilation

    [ad_1]

    In Africa, an estimated 55 million girls under the age of 15 have experienced – or are at risk of experiencing – FGM. Credit: Shutterstock
    • Opinion by Stephanie Musho, Esther M Passaris (nairobi)
    • Inter Press Service

    The consequences are devastating and far-reaching, permeating social, political and economic facets of daily life. Consider that the current and future financial cost of health care alone for women living with conditions caused by FGM is USD 1.4 billion   annually.  Yet,  over 4 million women and girls remain at risk of undergoing this violation.

    Unlike male circumcision that has been found to reduce transmission rates of HIV and sexually transmitted infections, FGM has no medical benefits. It is simply a function of patriarchy meant to sexually control women.  The consequences of FGM are dreadful.

    Survivors have spoken out on what sex is like after this heinous mutilation:  they feel no sexual pleasure, only excruciating pain. Childbirth is even worse as they are more susceptible to complications, increasing the prevalence of maternal mortality and morbidity by way of obstructed labor, fistula, post-partum hemorrhage, sepsis and ultimately death. The psychological effects are extensive too, resulting in, among other things, depression, crippling anxiety, and even suicide.

    Worse still is that the repercussions extend beyond physiology. FGM is often a precursor to child marriage, cutting off the prospects of a girl or young woman actualizing themselves. It is further compounded by conflict and climate crises. In such contexts, bride price is deemed to be an ‘easy escape’ from economic hardships. This false perception makes an already bad situation worse.

    In Africa, an estimated 55 million girls under the age of 15 have experienced – or are at risk of experiencing – FGM. This is despite the existence of robust laws and policies that criminalize this violation in at least 28 countries on the continent. For example  50% of these 55 million girls are found in three countries – Egypt, Ethiopia and Nigeria, and all three countries have criminalized the practice. This disregard of the rule of law can be attributed to deeply entrenched cultural dogma, founded on patriarchy that perpetuates the clashing of harmful culture with the legal code.

    Additionally, African women and girls in the diaspora, such as those among the 11 million Africans in Europe and 2 million in the U.S., continue to suffer, with little to no legal protections in place. Aggravating this is that undocumented migrants have little recourse, as seeking protection from FGM would expose them to detention and deportation.

    Besides, an emerging trend in the fight against FGM is the contention with cross border FGM. This is where communities travel outside of territories with stringent laws that criminalize the practice to carry out the violation elsewhere to avoid prosecution. This is termed ‘vacation cutting’. It is consequently imperative that FGM is criminalized everywhere, for there to be progress towards our shared global sustainable goals.

    The fight to end this scourge is made harder by the medicalization of FGM where health professionals conduct the practice in place of traditional ‘cutters’; in a fallacious and inadequate attempt to mitigate the damaging impacts of FGM.  In fact, a qualified medical doctor recently filed an application in the High Court challenging the prohibition of FGM, citing criminalization of the practice as a violation of bodily autonomy and an infringement of a woman’s right to uphold her culture. This is a reiteration of the need to double down efforts to eradicate the practice as there are those among us that remain committed to the continued relegation of women and girls, and their entrapment in vicious dependency and poverty cycles in the name of culture.

    It is then evident that ending FGM requires an armory of varied strategies. This begins with the understanding that when a country becomes party to an international legal instrument, it consents to limitations to its sovereignty and must therefore fulfil its obligations under international law.

    This includes those under African Charter on People’s and Human Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa – commonly known as the Maputo Protocol, for African States; and the United Nations Convention on the Elimination on all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), among others. These are important tools towards much needed universal criminalization of and ending FGM.

    The world is currently at the midpoint of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) set to elapse in 2030, and all indications point to a completely off-track trajectory – if not regression. If the current rate of progress continues, it could take nearly 300 years to attain gender equality.

    While some could argue that it is unrealistic to succeed in 7 years, it is certainly possible to accelerate action and shorten this depressing forecast. We must therefore accelerate action and truly leave no one behind. This means protecting those at risk of this horrendous violation of women and girls. Additionally, a needed increase in financial investments; and it makes financial sense to make them since ending FGM saves economies the costs of the attendant consequence.

    The time is now to focus on FGM because while there are ongoing efforts to reform the global financial architecture towards financing for development, these have been heavily centered on climate action.  Whilst this is indeed important, the relegation of other goals in this pursuit runs the risk of pushing them – including those on women and girls further to the periphery. These spaces must be expanded towards intersectional collaboration towards financing and meeting our people and planetary goals.

    Additionally, there are at least 40 general and presidential elections slated for next year. Fifteen elections are in Africa; 7 in the Americas; 8 in Asia; another 8 in Europe and 2 in Oceania. It is an opportune time for the electorate to demand the inclusion of gender and health rights like ending FGM in manifestos as a start.

    People can appraise track records and thereafter hold elected leaders accountable to their commitments including on increased budgetary allocations and transparency in expenditure. Good governance is indeed central to these efforts.

    Ultimately, ending FGM requires a concerted effort, a global push with full solidarity where everyone has a responsibility to act. If the rights of women and girls are not prioritized and intersectionality leveraged, as deliberated on at the just concluded International Conference on FGM, we will ultimately fail to achieve Agenda 2030 in its entirety and possibly even our health and gender goals in our lifetime.

     

    Stephanie Musho is a human rights lawyer and campaigner; and an Aspen New Voices Senior Fellow

    Hon. Esther Passaris is a Member of Parliament in the Republic of Kenya and a member of the Pan African Parliament 

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • International Human Rights Law As a Tool To Stop Rising Homophobia in Africa

    International Human Rights Law As a Tool To Stop Rising Homophobia in Africa

    [ad_1]

    Currently, there are four African countries that operate capital punishment for being gay. These are Mauritania, Niger, Somalia and South Sudan. Credit: Dai Kurokawa/EPA
    • Opinion by Stephanie Musho (nairobi)
    • Inter Press Service

    This comes almost a decade after a similar law dubbed ‘Kill the Gays’, was repealed on procedural grounds. For years, the issue of LGBTQ+ rights in the country has been a game of psychological and emotional ping-pong where every so often the worst fears come close to becoming a reality with the enactment and repeal of these laws. Consider the renewed anguish that members of the LGBTQ+ community now face with the alarming possibilities that this draconian Bill seeks to make law.

    Under this legislative proposal, homosexual ‘conduct’ by adults is not recognized as consensual. This would essentially categorize LGBTQ+ persons with sex offenders including rapists. Additionally, persons who simply identify as LGBTQ+ would face a penalty of up to 10 years in prison. The Bill also seeks, among other things, to punish the ‘promotion of homosexuality’ – that extends to family members and allies including the staff of human rights organizations.

    The Bill seeks to introduce the offence of ‘aggravated homosexuality’ where offenders would be subjected to mandatory HIV testing to ascertain the status of the offender. If found to be HIV positive or is a serial offender, could face the death penalty. Not only is this discrimination on sexual orientation, but discrimination based on health status. This is illegal, immoral and unethical.

    Despite the last execution happening in 2005, Uganda still maintains the laws and structures to carry out execution orders. Currently, there are four African countries that operate capital punishment for being gay. These are Mauritania, Niger, Somalia and South Sudan.

    These homophobic ideologies have also gained traction in West Africa, where Ghana’s parliament is also considering an anti-gay proposed law officially known as the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, 2021. If passed, LGBTQ+ persons face between three to five years imprisonment.

    Marrying a person that has had gender reassignment surgery would be outlawed and so would cross-dressing. The government could also force ‘’corrective surgery’’ for intersex persons. Additionally, advocates and allies of the LGBTQ+ community could face jail time for offering their support and protection to sexual and gender minorities.

    Since the introduction of these Bills, the LGBTQ+ community and allies in Uganda and Ghana have been the subject of numerous hate crimes including harassment and intimidation, arbitrary arrests and assaults. Just recently, a senior ranking government official in Uganda declared that gay people should not be treated in state-owned public health facilities.

    In Kenya, a Member of Parliament, Peter Kaluma, has recently submitted to the Speaker of the National Assembly an anti-homosexuality proposed law through the Family Protection Bill. The homophobic Bill has similarities with the ones in Uganda and Ghana. It criminalizes homosexuality and its promotion.

    Additionally, the Bill seeks to limit the rights to assembly, demonstration, association, expression, belief, privacy, and employment in child care institutions in respect of homosexuality convicts and those engaged in LGBTQ behavior. If the Bill goes through, LGBTQ+ persons in Kenya will also be unable to adopt children and found families. Worth noting is that the Bill also seeks to ban sexual health & rights, and sexual education.

    This came shortly after the Supreme Court in Constitutional Petition 16 of 2019 ruled that the government’s refusal to register an organization of persons within the LGBTQI+ community amounts to violation of the freedom of association and freedom from discrimination. Mr. Kaluma compares the natural act of two consenting adults deciding to love each other, ‘a vice that will destroy the society’. He even likened it to bestiality. Other leaders have been vocal against LGBTQ+ rights including the President – William Ruto, who is heavily influenced by religion.

    This opposition extends to the wider ambit of sexual and reproductive health rights. Here there is a coordinated attack on bodily autonomy and choice, driven majorly by foreign organizations. There also remains steadfast opposition within the gender and reproductive justice movement, particularly in Kenya.

    It is a fallacy to claim to be an organization working on sexual and reproductive health and/or rights but draw the line at access to contraceptives and comprehensive sexuality education for adolescents; or at access to safe abortion. Similarly, it is logically impossible to be a human rights organization but take issue with LGBTQ+ rights. The underpinning principles and values of human rights stipulate that they are interdependent. The absence of one right negates the fulfillment of another.

    Uganda, Ghana and Kenya all have obligations under international human rights law. These are legally binding and not merely suggestive. By allowing the progression of these anti-LGBTQ+ laws, these governments will have violated the human rights of their own people. These include freedom from torture and cruel punishment, freedom from discrimination, freedom of expression, the right to privacy and all other rights that pertain to the security of person.

    One might argue that the homophobic wave in Africa is quickly spreading because LGBTQ+ rights are un-African. The opposite is true. In pre-colonial Uganda, the King of the Buganda Kingdom, Kabaka Mwanga II, was an openly bisexual man. He did not face any resistance until the advent of the white Christian missionaries.

    Many other African cultures had women husbands where same-sex marriage was allowed. There are 19 African countries where homosexuality is legal. Does it then mean that these countries are less African than the rest? The criminalization of gay rights in Africa is in fact another detrimental product of colonialism on the continent.

    Additionally, religious dogma is often advanced to curtail human rights. Despite whichever faith we subscribe to, none is underpinned on hate and intolerance. It is therefore ironic that the proponents of such like legislative proposals are seeking to legalize targeted violence and killings on people not because they have done harm, but merely because they are different.

    Regional and international human rights mechanisms must therefore be ready and willing to hold these three African states accountable to their international legal obligations should the proposed homophobic laws pass in the respective jurisdictions.

    Member states of the United Nations and other multilateral organizations must follow through with sanctions that are targeted at government officials including the legislators that introduce the inhumane Bills. African states must no longer hide under the principle of sovereignty to claw back on human rights in justifying the mistreatment and deaths of human beings.

    Stephanie Musho is a human rights lawyer and a Senior Fellow with the Aspen Institute’s New Voices Fellowship.

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link