“There is a lack of systems in place to sufficiently document crimes committed against LGBTIQ persons globally. Evidence of violations is the only way in which our governments can believe, respond and plan for better interventions. Hate and violence exists because of systemic failures to adequately protect persons on the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics.”
This report by Iranti presents data about violence against LGBTQI people in five African countries.
Arcus commissioned the production of this report in the context of the strategic planning of its Social Justice Program. The report is part of an effort by Arcus to learn about LGBTQ communities in its focus geographic regions and countries, along its strategy contributing to increased safety, legal protection, and social inclusion. The information contained within reflects the opinions of its authors and not necessarily those of Arcus. Arcus uses some but not all of the findings to guide grantmaking decisions.
Violence against LGBQTI+ persons is a critical area of concern for the African continent. Whilst there has been an increase in the number of civil society organisations, NGOs advocating for the seizure of violence against LGBTQI persons and immense legislative strides made with regards to the affordance of LGBTQI human rights, violence continues to proliferate and mars the experiences of many an LGBTQ person.
LGBTQI persons living in Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa and Uganda all face significant threats to their wellbeing and safety. The right to safety is central to the affordance of dignity, integrity and the recognition of LGBTQI peoples’ citizenship as full citizenship. It is therefore imperative to review the extent to which LGBTQI persons in the aforementioned countries experience violence based on their gender expression and sexual identities. It is important to explore the mechanisms placed by the various states in an attempt to mitigate the violence faced by the LGBTQI community. Part of ensuring the rights to safety and advocating for legislative and policy reforms necessitates appropriate data capturing systems and mechanisms that provide sound and accurate depictions of LGBTQI peoples’ experiences of violence.
The extent of the violence and discrimination faced by LGBTQI persons in each country has been gauged using a combination of qualitative and quantitative data. In each of the five countries, organisations, activists and community networks are working to prevent, document, and respond to violence against LGBTQI persons. Both Kenya and South Africa have robust and visible LGBTQI movements, with networks of grassroots activists, and formal and community-based organisations. Uganda has an established LGBTQI movement that grew stronger in the period of advocacy against the anti-homosexuality bill. This movement has however faced severe repression from the Ugandan state and right-wing sentiments in the country. In all three of these countries there have been both informal and more formal data collection efforts. Although none of the three - Kenya, South Africa and Uganda - have successfully produced national level data on the total number of violations, they have all produced useful quantitative data as well as rich ethnographic accounts and qualitative analyses that give insight into the experiences of LGBTQI persons.
Malawi has a relatively broad network of human rights organisations working for the rights of LGBTQI persons, however the intense legal, political and social repression means that the movement is much less visible than in the other countries. In this context existing NGOs have been reasonably successful in collecting data that confirms the vulnerability of LGBTQI persons in Malawi.
Finally, Botswana has a small but growing network of LGBTQI organisations and activists. These organisations have successfully partnered with government and international organisations to produce data on violations related to healthcare access, however the data outside of this scope is largely qualitative.
The burden of data collection has, for the most part, fallen onto NGOs. Again, with the exception of South Africa, governments collect little data on violence perpetrated against LGBTQI persons. The only data that has consistently been collected by governments is collected through KP projects as part of wider HIV/AIDS strategies. In all five countries, studies on KP have, to some extent, included data on violations of LGBTI persons. The use of this data however has varied widely, in Kenya the government’s HIV/AIDS program included various KP focused projects, including sensitizations of healthcare workers and police officers, and efforts to curb broader discrimination. Botswana on the other hand, despite collecting a small amount of data on the violation of MSM and transgender persons through KP studies, does not address any specific programs to these groups. In fact, MSM and transgender persons are largely excluded from Botswana’s KP work. Despite having the most appropriate infrastructure to collect such data, the criminal justice systems in Botswana, Kenya, Uganda and Malawi do not collect data on violence perpetrated against members of the LGBTQI community. This may be explained in part by the fact that in these four countries government officials are essentially perpetrators as much as, and usually more than they are protectors. For this reason, there are very low levels of reporting to police, for fear of further violation.
It is not surprising then that there is almost no government response to these violations in Botswana, Kenya, Malawi and Uganda. There have been an insignificant number of arrests and prosecutions in those few cases that are reported. Despite South Africa’s progressive legislative framework and government interventions, this has failed to penetrate the workings of the criminal justice system in ways which are beneficial to LGBTQI persons. While a small number of cases have led to arrests and even prosecution, this represents only a fraction of violations, and is the result of sustained advocacy and campaigning. The relatively low number of arrests and convictions should however be understood in the context of a generally ineffective justice system in which only those with economic power can reasonably expect to access state justice.
Across all five countries, and every organisation, there was agreement on the importance of data collection as a tool and strategy for making LGBTQI persons safer. Accurate data enables organisations to target their interventions, adjust their strategies and evaluate their impact. It has also become fundamental to effective resource mobilization and advocacy, particularly at the state level. Data collection tools have also doubled as tools for emergency response, with real time violation reporting making documentation the first step in the process of response.