The upholding of the Anti-Homosexuality Act by the Constitutional Court today has put Uganda back into the international spotlight.
In a ruling, court said it found that the law complies with the Constitution although it nullified four sections of the Act and it said contravened the Constitution.
For Parliament which passed the law and advocates of a “moral society” like Pastor Martin Ssempa, court’s decision represents a major victory for the endeavors.
While passing the contentious law last year, MPs argued it was needed to protect the country against “moral decay” especially the young generation.
But human rights activists countered the law was archaic, infringed on the basic international human rights and would endanger the LGBTQI+ community.
Nicholas Opiyo, a prominent rights activist said they disagreed with the judgement and were consulting on the next steps. He said the judgement was a “letdown.”
“To base a decision on public sentiments, purported cultural values, and unfounded/unsubstantiated allegations of recruitment into homosexuality is strange, to say the least,” Opiyo posted on X, minutes after the ruling.
Andrew Mwenda, one of the petitioners against the law said they would appeal in the Supreme Court.
The passing of the law last year led to the isolation of Uganda within sections of the international community.
Some MPs at the forefront of the passing of the law like Asuman Basalirwa and Speaker Anita Among suffered the brunt of this isolation. They have been denied visas to countries like the US and United Kingdom.
But the bigger impact was felt by Uganda when a handful of western countries cut aid and some like the United States declined to renew trade deals with Kampala such as AGOA citing the law.
With the court ruling that now firmly upholds the law, a similar or worse backlash is expected. Analysts predict more aid cuts which could affect the implementation of programmes like the HIV/AIDS projects, Universal Primary Education and others.
If this happens, government will be forced to cut expenditure in some areas to plug the holes brought about by the aid cuts.
This puts President Museveni, who has locally projected himself as someone who can stand up to the western powers, in a fix.
Museveni, those close to him say, is a smooth political operator who knows the full impact of such a law on Uganda’s economy.
“He knows he still needs the support of the United States and European Union for Uganda’s mission in Somalia so he will try to reach out to the West diplomatically and through other channels,” said a former government minister who requested anonymity.
The former minister predicted that the law will not be fully implemented like others on the statute books.
However, he said, it could be used to gag civil society, independent media organizations and opposition politicians and to blackmail them as supporters of gays.
Still, it is too early to predict how the ruling will impact on Uganda and her relationship with western donors. Nonetheless, it has put Uganda squarely back into the spotlight.
How I wish they cut all aid. It is useless because it has stifled this country’s ability to fend for itself, and has promoted and deepened grand corruption in the country. Uganda has enough resources to meet its needs but because of aid flows, our own resources and the aid are all squandered on high administrative costs and corruption. My prayer is, indeed, that this ruling aggravates the situation further for the country and leads to more aid cuts so that we can come back to our senses and begin thinking and acting correctly on our priorities and development as a country.