Why are we selective on our African values?

It is not uncommon to encounter arguments in public spaces premised on “African culture”, a term that I find problematic owing to the ambiguity therein. My professor once asked the class if this term insinuated one single African culture. Of course, the philosophers in us were quick to interject her: In spite of a myriad African cultures, there are numerous points of convergences that cut across them, especially regarding values and customs.

This is very evident in the folk literature across our beautiful continent. However, it is always fascinating when African culture is selectively alluded to during debates and other fora. The most recent was the defence put up by Deputy Speaker of Parliament Thomas Tayebwa during the just concluded African, Caribbean and Pacific – European Union (ACP-EU) Parliamentary Assembly hosted by Mozambique. Tayebwa raised serious legitimate concerns with which issues regarding sexuality and sexual orientation are tactfully woven in the human rights discourse.

Tasking the EU to elaborate their broad definition of human rights, Tayebwa boldly told the audience that homosexuality [and abortion] violate African values; and therefore, it makes no sense to ascent to laws that would not be domesticated locally. I will demonstrate why I agree, but also disagree with Tayebwa.  Human rights are inalienable by nature and inherent to all human beings. Simply put, nobody has the authority to take another person’s rights away. It is against this backdrop that anyone who assumes pseudo-legitimacy to violate another person’s rights is reprimanded. In his submission, Tayebwa is very cognizant about this fact, however, he disapproves the promotion of homosexuality in Africa as a human right. In other words, persons who are homosexual – by nature or nurture – should enjoy their rights grounded in their human nature as opposed to their sexual orientation. We need not be lectured or directed by the West over such fundamental issues.

The question of sexual minorities is another, altogether. What I find debatable, however, is whether our political leaders’ bold rejection of homosexuality can be alluded to homophobia or the commonly sung chorus of African values. Let’s problematise this issue drawing from the indifference and pseudo-legitimacy with which leaders treat some issues affecting society.

According to this newspaper, for instance, total value of loss through the various corruption conduits within both government and private spheres is estimated at Shs9.144 trillion annually. Systemic corruption has denied millions of Ugandans from accessing proper health facilities, good education, clean water and sanitation and, reliable and efficient public transport systems. Hundreds of families have lost their land through land grabbing and illegal evictions by wealthy and powerful people in our country, who sometimes enjoy state protection. Many who do not share the same opinions with the ruling government have since become ‘political prisoners’ as was evident during the last electioneering period.

Not even the environment has survived the wrath of social injustice: Swamp reclamation by “land developers” and indiscriminate encroachment on forest reserves by the wealthy at the expense of rural folk who are unfortunately less cushioned from the effects of environmental destruction. I believe that our highly lauded African values equally speak against the social injustices highlighted above; and yet do not attract the same measure of rebuke as the thorny discourse on homosexuality.

This clearly demonstrates selective allusion to African values on issues that are convenient to our leaders. Tayebwa rightly noted that the Western ideas on sexuality threaten the institution of family in Africa. I agree. However, the other ‘real threats’ to families – poverty, hunger, poor healthcare, and education, financial exclusion, etc - have not been as boldly rebuked as the question of homosexuality.

Mr Augustine Bahemuka, commentator on issues of peace and society

[email protected]