Anti-Gay law is a masterstroke if you’re crafting ways to sort irritants

A friend told us a story this weekend about a surveillance system that was procured to, ostensibly, serve national security interests. To test its efficiency, those who were in charge started by surveilling their wives and finding out who they were talking to, where they were, and with whom.
They then moved to themselves, eavesdropping on conversations and intercepting messages coming in and going out. Apparently, the discovery of who was talking to whom and what caused such a fallout that the system wouldn’t even get deployed. That is what happens when you do bad things for a good reason.  It is what usually happens in instances where laws can be subject to the convenience and interpretation of those in power.

Another friend recently said in passing, “Eyo NUP ya bisiyaga.” There was no evidence to [support] the accusation that NUP belongs to homosexuals but what’s the use? Now, there will be a law against which stories and blanket accusations like this can be acted upon. As you might already know, the Parliament of Uganda is currently debating a new anti-gay bill.
The debate came out of left field but those backing the bill – including of course religious leaders – are quite bullish. They say there is an underground homosexual agenda being promoted in schools and children getting lured with offers of money.
The bill has four objectives: the prohibition of same-sex sexual relations; the strengthening of Uganda’s capacity to deal with domestic and foreign threats to the heterosexual family; safeguarding of traditional and cultural values; and the protection of youth/children against gay and lesbian practice. All in themselves, for good reasons. As this newspaper reported last week, the proposed penalties for offenders are also quite severe. From jail terms to fines ranging between Shs 5 million to 100 million. 

Also, they aren’t simply going for those engaging in acts of homosexuality or its promotion but landlords, executives, journalists, and whoever will in some way be found to be connected. I would be happy to argue the merits and demerits of the proposed law but in subjective moral debates such as this, objective analysis is seldom welcome. Ultimately, it is up to a country and its leaders to legislate for and against whatever they so choose – and if the lawmakers have decided that this is it then nothing will stop them.

Laws and gung-ho actions like this are interesting because of the context from which they arise and in which they are supposed to exist. We are not a normal country by many measures and that is the prism through which this law must be looked at. The problem is not the laws, it is the country, stupid!
We already have instances in which opposition politicians have been arrested and charged with the “Offence of Preventive Arrest”. True story. Others where you can be on remand for more than a year without ever having your day in court. The same country where the 48-hour detention rule has – in practice – been almost done away with and you can stay in the coolers for as long as those holding you so choose. 
That is the country in which this law is being introduced. A thinking head wouldn’t need that long to conjure tens of ways in which we can protect and safeguard children, advance the heterosexual family and protect our values and traditions against homosexuality. 

A law that will in all estimation be abused – because that always happens – to target whomever one has a grudge against would probably not make the list. What we need is not more laws but to figure out what we must do to get to where we should. Yet, because actions don’t work even with good intentions here is what might happen. 
If you are having trouble paying rent, have a land or business dispute with another, are afraid of losing an election, or coveting someone’s wife, call the popo. You should be in the clear by the time they come out.

Mr Rukwengye is the founder, Boundless Minds. @Rukwengye