ENGAGEMENT OR CONFRONTATION STRATEGIES - WHICH WAY FOR KENYA?

LGBTI activism in Kenya, has to this date been characterized by engagement and partnership-building between the rights activists and mainstream human rights organizations as well as organizations working in HIV/AIDS field. Yet the challenges that face the LGBTI people in Kenya do not seem to reduce in any significant way leading to discussions among the activists whether this is the right strategy or there is need now, to shift gears and become more emphatic in our activism.

LGBTI SITUATION IN KENYA.

The situation of LGBTI people in Kenya is characterized by three main factors. The first is the Law which criminalizes same-sex sexuality among men. There are possibilities of also using the same provisions liberally to apply to women engaged in same-sex sexuality though there are no recorded cases of this happening.  The full text of the laws are contained here

 There has not been any public discussion about these provisions of the law in Kenya, though during the constitutional reform process in 2005, there was a concerted effort mainly from the religious sector to define marriage in such a way that same-sex couples do not ever get married in Kenya.

 As luck would have it, the draft was rejected and since then the process of reviewing the constitution is still on-going. GALCK has made a presentation to the Committee of Experts on what it hopes should be contained in the new constitution. Between now and the time when the country will get a new constitution, the laws cited above continue to obtain.

 Because of these laws, LGBTI persons are continually exposed to blackmail and extortion, from both the law enforcement agencies and organized criminals, who perceive them to be a soft target. Galck continues to receive cases on daily basis of members of the LGBTI community who have been forced to part with the maximum amounts of money that they can afford, to have secrets about their lives not revealed either to their families, employers or in the case of the police, not to prosecute them. This remains one of the biggest problems that the LGBTI community face in Kenya today.

 To be sure, blackmail and extortion have such a stronghold on the community not merely because of the law, even though the law makes it difficult to address this problem but because most LGBTI people often lead their sexualities under great secrecy. The enormous stigma associated with being homosexual makes it difficult for LGBTI persons to be open about their sexual orientation. Additionally even in the rare event where LGBTI persons come from more accepting backgrounds, the sense of shame around the family still enforces a code of silence, that then becomes a goldmine for the blackmailers. Ignorance about the nature of sexuality and diversity in sexual orientations, feeds into stigma, which in turn leads families into feelings of shame and embarrassment, and hence the enforcement of silence and secrecy.

 Blackmail and extortion are crimes under the Kenyan law, and there are enough legal protections for victims of these crimes. At Galck in partnership with a leading mainstream human rights organization, we are working on supporting victims of these twin crimes access justice, but the need maintain secrecy continually undermines any headway we make.  The law criminalizing same-sex practices would need to be repealed not just to reduce the cases of these two crimes, but also to make it possible for the activists to educate the society on the truth about sexual orientation.

 It is with this in mind, that activists in Kenya are discussing about the most efficacious strategies to activism. Currently there are two schools of thought who advocate differing strategies, to get the country to repeal the offensive sections of the penal code, but also to engage the society with a view of reducing stigma and discrimination against the LGBTI Kenyans.

 THESE STRATEGIES INCLUDE:

 1. ENGAGEMENT AND DIALOGUE.

This strategy has as its underlying assumption that it is possible through engagement and dialogue, for the Kenyan society to realize that criminalization of same-sex sexuality infringes on the rights of the LGBTI citizens and also in an era of HIV/AIDS, the laws put the entire society at risk. They argue that it is in the best interest of the Kenyan society to de-criminalize adult same-sex sexuality so that it can become possible for AIDS activists to give targeted information to the LGBTI persons in Kenya.

 Critics of this strategy however argue that though the benefits of engaging have come in handy, they have had more to do with discussions around HIV/AIDS - where the wider society appreciates that it is in their interest to provide HIV information to LGBTI Kenyans, because of the evidence of their involvement in heterosexual relationships.

 The critics say that there has not been any remarkable appreciation of the need to provide a situation that respects the rights of the LGBTI person in Kenya any more than the need to change the laws or indeed enact protective, non-discrimination clauses in our constitution on the basis of sexual orientation.

 There is still widespread homophobia even among health practitioners including the mainstream human rights organization. There lacking any forceful challenge to the status quo, bias against LGBTI persons will continue, hence the opponents of this strategy view it as timid, impotent and incapable of bringing about the desired change.

 2. ENCOUNTER & CONFRONT STRATEGY.

The underlying assumption for this strategy is that human rights are non-negotiable, and no one need to beg for their basic human rights to be respected. Moreover rights are claimed not given, hence the need to be forceful in this claim, and none too apologetic either. This strategy draws a lot of lessons from two Swahili sayings: “mtaka cha mvunguni, sharti ainame - if you want something you have to work for it” and “ämani haiji ila kwa ncha ya upanga - peace comes at the pain of the sword”

 This strategy has obvious benefits, such as bringing to the fore, the contradictions inherent in our government system, which appears to have enough money to kill but not enough to heal. The Kenyan government has for instance gone to beg for funds from the global fund, for its HIV programming while at the same time enforcing laws that lead to increase in HIV infections. These contradictions need to be brought out and forcefully so that responsible individuals can be held to account.

 The major criticism against this strategy is that, it is abrasive and not appropriate where there is good rapport between the LGBTI organizations and the main partners including the mainstream human rights organizations and government bodies. Being abrasive critics say, will lead to alienation and isolation which then becomes difficult to engage and educate the critical sectors of our society, - education being an important step to realizing comprehensive emancipation of the LGBTI persons in Kenya.

 Additionally critics say, we are currently at critical point in our activism, where very many people particularly from small towns around the country want to participate in activism, and an aggressive strategy would put them at risk, hence they are less likely to join the movement.

 By building a national movement, we not only give all LGBTI Kenyans an opportunity to seek support and information from centres that are near to them, but we also syndicate the risks that come with LGBTI activism. The society and indeed the government will be less likely to crackdown on the activists, when their activism is spread out the country, as opposed to when its concentrated in a few towns of Nairobi and Mombasa.