Outrage HIV Justice Film Festival debuts at AIDS 2014 in Melbourne, first ever film festival to focus on HIV criminalisation

In the lead-up to AIDS 2014, ten powerful thought-provoking films from seven countries over three days (18, 19 and 21 July 2014) will outrage Melbourne film-goers by exploring how laws and policies aimed at controlling, punishing or disempowering specific groups of people living with, or at risk of HIV, harms not only human rights, but also the broader response to the HIV epidemic.

Curated by international HIV activist Edwin Bernard, co-ordinator of the HIV Justice Network, the Outrage HIV Justice Film Festival is presented in partnership with ACMI (Australian Centre for the Moving Image), Victorian AIDS Council and Living Positive Victoria.

The Outrage HIV Justice Film Festival includes four themed sessions: Women’s Injustices; Challenging HIV Criminalisation; Australian Responses to HIV Injustices; and Activism Against HIV Injustices.

“As the AIDS 2014 ‘Melbourne Declaration’ shines a spotlight on HIV injustices at the conference, the Outrage HIV Justice Film Festival‘s films, director Q&As, and panel discussions, will reveal the real stories behind the stigmatising mainstream media headlines, hopefully changing hearts and minds so that people understand why it’s important to advocate for change,” says the festival’s curator, Edwin Bernard, whose HIV Justice Network campaigns for an end to inappropriate uses of criminal laws to regulate and punish people living with HIV.

The Outrage HIV Justice Film Festival includes films never seen before in Australia and visits countries as diverse as Canada and Cambodia. “I hope that the sophisticated Melbourne cinema audience will be interested in challenging themselves to learn more about the forced HIV testing and imprisonment of a group of disenfranchised women in Greece, who were scapegoated by a cynical government trying to win votes in the 2012 election (in Zoe Mavroudi’s ‘Ruins: Chronicle of an HIV Witch-Hunt‘) or the harrowing impact of state-sponsored homophobia on the lives gay men and women in Jamaica (in Micah Fink’s ‘The Abominable Crime’),” says Edwin Bernard.

Other HIV criminalisation-related films include Positive Women: Exposing Injustice (Canada, 2012); Mark S King: HIV Criminalization Face-Off (US, 2012); HIV is Not a Crime (US, 2011); and How could she go on living as if weren’t there (Sweden, 2010).

“After each screening we’ll also be hearing from the film-makers themselves, many of whom are coming to Melbourne to talk about why they were outraged enough by these HIV injustices to make these films,” notes Bernard, whose own film ‘More Harm Than Good‘ is showing alongside three other short films that explore why a criminal justice approach to HIV prevention is hurting the HIV response.

“The moving image is a powerful expression of human experience. Through a diversity of perspectives, opinion, ideas, stories and images, the moving image helps us make sense of ourselves and our world through dynamic social, cultural and creative exchange. We’re delighted to have worked with our partners to present a compelling programme of cinema and talks focused on such a critical and important issue”. Helen Simondson, ACMI Public Programs Manager.

“This festival will, for the first time in Melbourne, bring together activist voices from around the world showing powerful work that highlights the injustice of HIV related discrimination,” says Simon Ruth, Chief Executive Officer of the Victorian AIDS Council. “Through documentary and drama, the diversity of the films is compelling, moving and ultimately inspiring.”

Punitive laws and policies aimed at controlling, punishing or disempowering specific groups of people living with, or at risk of HIV, is a hot topic and central theme of AIDS 2014, the much anticipated meeting of the International AIDS Society and largest international conference ever to be held in Melbourne.

“HIV justice is a key issue for people living with HIV in Melbourne as it is in many places around the world where even worse laws exist. Victoria still has punitive laws in place that we are fighting to have repealed. Outrage HIV Justice Film Festival takes advantage of AIDS 2014 to bring broader awareness of the damaging impact of unfair laws about HIV,” says Brent Alan, Executive Officer of Living Positive Victoria. “I hope as many Victorians as possible take advantage of the marvellous programme Edwin has curated to be presented in Melbourne’s home of cinema, ACMI.”

For more information and bookings visit www.outragefilmfestival.com or http://www.acmi.net.au/justice-film-festival-2014.aspx.

MEDIA ANNOUNCEMENT – Outrage HIV Justice Film Festival 18-21 July 2014

Flat funding, harsh laws could hurt Uganda's battle against HIV

KAMPALA, 25 June 2014 (IRIN) – Inadequate funding coupled with harsh laws targeting same sex unions could erode the gains so far made in the fight against HIV in Uganda, activists warn.

US: On eve of national HIV criminalisation conference Iowa's remarkable advocacy success is the model for other states to follow

If Gov. Terry Branstad signs Senate File 2297 on Friday as planned, Iowa will become the first state in the country to repeal and replace its criminal transmission of HIV law, activists say.

The law being reformed had been on the books since 1998. A broad coalition of groups, led by the Community HIV and Hepatitis Advocates of Iowa Network (CHAIN), has been working for the past five years to modernize it.

Advocates said the new law better reflects advances in science, medicine and understanding of how HIV is transmitted.

Until now, Iowa has had one of the harshest HIV transmission laws in the country. Under the 1998 law, persons with HIV could face 25 years in prison and inclusion on the sex offender registry if they could not prove they disclosed their status to a sexual partner — even if no transmission occurred and precautions such as condoms were used.

Under the new law, there is a tiered penalty system, which takes into account whether a person took precautions, whether transmission of HIV actually occurred and whether or not the person intended to transmit HIV.

The new law also adds other infectious diseases to the bill such as hepatitis, tuberculosis and meningococcal disease, which causes meningitis — so the law is no longer HIV-specific.

Finally, it removes the requirement those convicted register as sex offenders, and it will allow people convicted under the old law to be expunged from the registry.

Both the Iowa House and Senate unanimously approved the bill this year, a stark contrast to the four previous years, when similar bills languished in the legislature.

“You have to be in it for the long haul. It’s not an easy process,” CHAIN community organizer Tami Haught said of the group’s lobbying efforts. “We’re still dealing with a lot of the stigma that was around in the ’80s.”

She said when activists set out to change the law five years ago, they hoped to simply see the criminalization law repealed. But that wasn’t palatable to some lawmakers and county prosecutors, who said they still wanted to hold people with HIV accountable for protecting their sexual partners.

Finding ways to compromise was key to getting the sweeping bipartisan support needed, Haught said. Other tactics included meeting frequently with lawmakers, engaging in community education and gathering as many organizations to voice their support as possible.

CHAIN partnered with groups ranging from the Iowa Attorney General’s Office and the Iowa Department of Health to the League of Women Voters, the Family Planning Council and the Interfaith Alliance.

“We were up at the capitol almost every day it was in session talking with legislators. and that’s what needed to happen,” Haught said. “In 2014, maybe there was only one legislator who was not familiar with the law. When we started, a majority of legislators didn’t even know the law existed.”

NATIONAL ACTIVISTS LOOK TO IOWA

CHAIN’s tactics will be on display next week. The changes to Iowa’s law made national news, and activists hope to replicate those efforts in other states.

National group the Sero Project, founded by Iowa City native Sean Strub, is organizing a conference, HIV Is Not a Crime, to be held in Grinnell starting on Monday of next week.

Numerous laws similar to Iowa’s were passed in different parts of the country in the late 1990s in the wake of a high profile 1996 incident in New York. In that case, a man was charged with intentionally infecting 13 women and girls with HIV.

Additional pressure came from the federal government, which at the time required states to have an HIV transmission law on the books to access federal funding for HIV prevention and treatment through the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE) Act.

Today, there are 34 states with a HIV-specific criminalization on the books. Only two had harsher penalties than Iowa. Now, Iowa has become a model for how change could happen elsewhere.

When they started work on the conference, organizers were hoping for perhaps 50 people to attend. As of earlier this week, more than 170 activists from across the United States and four other countries have signed up to spend June 2 through 5 to learn and share lobbying and education techniques related to HIV transmission decriminalization.

“We wanted to bring advocates to one place and give them the tools to go home and try to modernize the laws,” Haught said.

Foremost of those tools should be a willingness for people living with HIV to share their own stories, she said.

“We need to speak up and show we are your neighbors, your friends, your family members,” she said. “Sharing our stories had a great impact on legislators.”

Some of those who has shared their stories include Iowans convicted under the 1998 law. One of those is Donald Bogardus, 43, of Waterloo.

GETTING HIS LIFE BACK

Bogardus was convicted under the old law after authorities said he had unprotected sex with a man three times in 2009.

The man didn’t contract HIV. Bogardus had an undetectable viral load, which means the virus could not be detected in his blood.

People with an undetectable viral load have almost no chance of transmitting the virus. The new law takes that into consideration when sentencing — the old law did not.

“It was not my intent to hurt him by far,” Bogardus said in a video the Sero Project made to tell his story. “The reason I didn’t disclose was I was afraid of rejection. I was afraid of being talked about. I was afraid of losing a friend.”

He spent two months in prison — he was facing 25 years — before receiving a suspended sentence in February, with two to five years of probation. He also had to register as a sex offender, which meant he lost his job as a certified nursing assistant at Country View, a Black Hawk County-owned nursing and mental health care center.

Now that his name will be taken off the registry, effective July 1, he’s hopeful he will be able to return to his old job.

“It has lifted a burden off of me. I’m just being able to get my life back,” he told The Gazette. “I felt like I was in a big cage, and now I feel some relief.”

He also believes the changed law will encourage more people to get tested in the first place because, under the old law, the only defense was not knowing you were HIV positive. The new law also encourages behavior public health officials are pushing, Haught said.

“Now we are incentivizing doing the right thing. If you are taking your medication and using protection, you can’t be prosecuted,” she said.

She said she wants HIV to be treated just as any other communicable disease.

“We’re hoping this will help reduce the stigma associated with being HIV positive and encourage testing and treatment,” she said.

Read more: http://thegazette.com/subject/news/new-hiv-transmission-law-makes-iowa-model-for-nation-20140529#ixzz33CDVnzKV

Australia: Campaign against Victoria’s HIV-specific criminal law launched to tie in with Melbourne Declaration for AIDS 2014

Living Positive Victoria, the organisation representing people living with HIV in the Australian state of Victoria, has launched a campaign for community and cross-party political support to reform the state’s HIV-specific criminal law, the only such law in Australia.

Section 19a of the Crimes Act 1958,’ Intentionally causing a very serious disease’ states

A person who, without lawful excuse, intentionally causes another person to be infected with a very serious disease is guilty of an indictable offence.

In subsection (1) very serious disease means HIV within the meaning of section 3(1) of the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 .

The statute, which treats HIV as exceptional and applies a uniquely higher penalty than for other crimes of violence, carries a 25 year maximum penalty.

The call for law reform is a response to the release of the Melbourne Declaration in advance of the 20th International AIDS conference, also known as AIDS 2014, to be held in Melbourne in late July.

“Leading into AIDS 2014 is a highly opportune moment to grasp the issue of law reform so that HIV is treated as a public health matter,” says Ian Muchamore, President of Living Positive Victoria.

The Melbourne Declaration focuses on the need to address multiple legal barriers in the global HIV response, in order “to defeat HIV and achieve universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, care and support”.

In line with the Oslo Declaration on HIV Criminalisation, it explicitly states that “nobody should be criminalized because they are living with HIV.” And elsewhere the Declaration “expresses concern at the continued enforcement of discriminatory, stigmatizing, criminalizing and harmful laws which lead to policies and practices that increase vulnerability to HIV.”

HIV criminalisation is set to be a major focus of international attention at AIDS 2014. Living Positive Victoria is one of the hosts of the Beyond Blame pre-conference (along with Victorian AIDS Council/Gay Men’s Health Centre, National Association of People Living with HIV Australia and Australian Federation of AIDS Organisations) which is supported by the AIDS and Rights Alliance of Southern Africa, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, Global Network of People Living with HIV, HIV Justice Network, International Community of Women Living with HIV, Sero Project and UNAIDS.

Read and sign the Melbourne Declaration here

Read and sign the Oslo Declaration here

Read the Living Positive Victoria press release here

Uganda: Parliament passes ‘deeply flawed’ HIV law, takes ‘giant leap backwards’: urge President Museveni to veto

After years of intensive debate and strong local and international advocacy against many of the problematic clauses found within Uganda’s omnibus HIV law, yesterday Uganda’s Parliament passed the HIV Prevention and Control Act virtually unchanged from this 2010 version.

The bill includes mandatory HIV testing for pregnant women and their partners, and allows medical providers to disclose a client’s HIV status to others. The bill also criminalises ‘wilful and intentional’ HIV transmission, attempted transmission, and behaviour that might result in transmission by those who know their HIV status. There are some excellent analyses of the problematic provisions at The Observer (Uganda) and the Science Speaks blog.

Clauses 39 (‘attempted transmission of HIV’) and 41 (‘intentional transmission of HIV’) were adopted in the debate last week, as were clauses 13, 14 and 15 on mandatory and routine testing, with unverified reports that the ambit of clause 13 (‘HIV testing for purposes of criminal proceedings’) was broadened further. (Follow Parliament Watch Uganda [@pwatchug] on Twitter for latest details of the actual text).

Today, two press releases from Human Rights Watch, HEALTH Global Advocacy Project, and Uganda Network on Law, Ethics & HIV/AIDS (UGANET) and The International Community of Women Living with HIV (ICW) condemned the passage of the law in the strongest terms. They are likely to be the first of many.

“This HIV bill is yet another step backward in the fight against AIDS in Uganda,” said Maria Burnett, senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. “It is founded on stigma and discrimination and based on approaches that have been condemned by international health agencies as ineffective and violating the rights of people living with HIV.”

Mandatory HIV testing and the disclosure of medical information without consent are contrary to international best practices and violate fundamental human rights, the three groups said. The criminalization of HIV transmission, attempted transmission, and behavior that might result in transmission by those who know their HIV status is overly broad, and difficult to enforce.

[…]

“For Uganda to address its HIV epidemic effectively, it needs to partner with people living with HIV, not blame them, criminalize them, and exclude them from policy making,” said Dorah Kiconco, executive director of Uganda Network on Law, Ethics & HIV/AIDS. “The president should not sign this bill and instead ensure a rights-based approach, recognizing that people living with HIV will prevent transmission if they are empowered and supported.”

[…]

“At the upcoming international AIDS conference, Uganda will be the example to all the countries gathered of how not to write laws on the HIV response,” said Asia Russell, international policy director at Health GAP (Global Access Project). “Parliamentarians are doing precisely the opposite of what Uganda should be doing to fight HIV.”

ICW’s press release is below

Today’s passage of the HIV Prevention and AIDS Control Bill represents a dangerous backslide in Uganda’s efforts to respond to HIV. While the bill may have been intended to facilitate and improve the HIV response in Uganda, the bill contains many poorly conceived and fear- induced provisions that have no place in a public health and human-rights-based response to HIV. As passed, this bill will actually weaken Uganda’s HIV prevention efforts and will have a detrimental and disproportionate impact on the rights of women and girls and in particular women living with HIV.

The International Community of Women Living with HIV Eastern Africa is extremely concerned about the devastating impact this law will have on the daily lives of women in Uganda. “It is disappointing that the Members of Parliament that we have engaged for so long, have ignored all the evidence, science and reason that we advanced as civil society organisations together with technocrats and scientists and chose instead, to act out of fear and unfounded hysteria – betraying the very will of the people that elected them to Parliament to represent their issues” said Lillian Mworeko, Regional Coordinator ICW EASTERN AFRICA.

The bill includes outdated and dangerous provisions for mandatory testing for pregnant women and their partners under Clause 14 (b) and (c). Mandatory testing of people living with HIV is a violation of fundamental human rights and accepted principles of informed consent and will negatively impact antenatal care attendance. Women—who will likely be the frequent target of these provisions— will shy away from hospitals and medical services. The devastating result will be that more children will be infected through mother to child transmission of HIV. Uganda is currently making strong strides towards zero infections from mother to child through use of proven strategies that emphasize voluntary counseling and testing. But Uganda’s gains could be lost if women are forced to test every time they visit a health facility. HIV testing of pregnant women, their partners and victims of sexual offenses must always be voluntary and conducted with informed consent.

“The fact that Uganda is even considering mandatory testing of pregnant women or victims of sexual offenses, represents a major step backwards for a country which showed early promise as an effective responder to HIV. Unfortunately, fear and ignorance have won the day in Uganda.” said Jessica Whitbread, Global Director of the International Community of Women Living with HIV.

Despite growing international consensus that criminalization is actually counter productive to the HIV prevention strategies, the Bill creates unnecessary and ill-advised additional criminal laws that criminalize attempted and intentional transmission of HIV. The International Community of Women living with HIV unequivocally opposes the criminalization of HIV status. The existing penal code already includes sufficient provisions to address criminal acts, creating additional parallel set of laws will just serve to persecute and punish people living with HIV. Criminalization will disproportionately impact women, who are more likely to know their HIV status through pregnancy related medical care. This provision will do little else but result in increased stigma and discrimination against people living with HIV, which are key drivers of the HIV epidemic.

Furthermore, the bill empowers medical workers to disclosure a person’s HIV sero status to a third party. Clause 21 (e); “where any other person with whom an HIV infected person is in close or continuous contact including but not limited to a sexual partner, if the nature of contact, in the opinion of the sexual medical practitioner, poses a clear and present danger of HIV transmission to that person;” Not only is this provision a clear violation of human rights and confidentiality but it is ripe for abuse by medical workers. Disclosure by medical workers of a person’s HIV status based purely on an individual opinion represents an institutionalized form of stigma and discrimination and dramatically increases the likelihood of violence against women living with HIV.

These poorly considered provisions at their best violate human rights and enshrine stigma and discrimination into law and at their worst will cause many people to shy away from accessing programs that work, such as prevention, treatment and care and support services including elimination of mother to child transmission services (eMTCT). Sadly, this bill undermines the very services that Uganda needs more than any other country in the world.

“Uganda is already facing a serious backslide from its early advances in responding to HIV, Uganda is currently one of three African countries experiencing increases in their HIV prevalence rates previously from 6.5% to 7.3 %. The passage of this Bill will only serve to increase this backslide and the President must save Uganda from this backlash”, says Margaret Happy, the Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights Officer, ICW Eastern Africa.

ICW Eastern Africa urges His Excellency Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, the President of Uganda, to rise above all and not assent to this Bill which is in contradiction of the commitments made by his wise assent to the East African Community HIV & AIDS Prevention and Management Act, 2012 .

Uganda: ‘Trial by media’ of nurse accused of exposing a child to HIV via injection sets a ‘dangerous precedent’

The ongoing case of Rosemary Namubiru, the Ugandan nurse accused of exposing a child to HIV during the course of administering an injection, is highlighted in a powerful press release issued yesterday by AIDS Free World. Fortunately, Ms Namubiru is being supported by several advocacy and human rights organisations as well as by individual HIV advocates in Uganda.

The inflammatory media coverage (an example of which is this horribly invasive TV news story, above) not only increased HIV-related stigma and violated Ms Namubiru’s right to a fair trial, but is also being used to help justify the passing of the draft HIV Prevention and AIDS Control Bill 2010 which includes a number of problematic provisions including mandatory HIV tests for pregnant women and their partners, and forced disclosure of HIV status to a newly diagnosed person’s partner by a medical practitioner. In addition, the Bill contains two overly broad and problematic HIV-specific criminal statutes.

In late 2009, a group of more than 50 Ugandan and international organisations and individuals released a report criticising many of the provisions of an earlier draft. That early advocacy resulted in the removal of a criminal penalty for the transmission of HIV from mother to child through breastfeeding.

Advocacy co-ordinated by the Uganda Network on Law, Ethics and HIV/AIDS (UGANET), continues to argue that the unfavourable clauses must be completely removed and that Uganda must assent to the East African Community (EAC) HIV & AIDS Prevention and Management Act which contains provisions meant to supersede Ugandan law.

Read the entire press release below and download the PDF version here.

HIV-Positive Nurse Tried by Media

––Uganda’s first court case dealing with criminalization of HIV transmission could have far-reaching consequences––

February 11, 2014 (Kampala, Uganda)––Rosemary Namubiru, a Ugandan nurse, stands accused of exposing a child to HIV during the course of administering an injection. The incident incited a media firestorm, leading to Namubiru’s arrest and trumped-up charges of attempted murder. That these were baseless charges was confirmed at the opening of the trial today when the charge was changed to criminal negligence; charges that could still carry up to seven years in prison. As the trial begins, it is clear that the damage has already been done. Namubiru was tried and convicted in the public eye by the media, violating her rights and presumption of innocence.

The implications of this case are far-reaching: the Namubiru case appears to be the first in Uganda’s courts dealing directly with HIV exposure and transmission. Efforts to criminalize HIV transmission, and the failure of both the media and the prosecutors office to act responsibly, set a dangerous precedent and could have grave consequences for the fundamental rights of people living with HIV and AIDS in Uganda and beyond.

Case Summary

Rosemary Namubiru, 64, a nurse with 35 years of experience, was working at the Victoria Medical Centre in Kampala, Uganda. On January 7, 2014, Namubiru was attempting to give an injection to an ill 2-year-old patient. Neither she nor the mother could calm the distraught child. With the child writhing and kicking, the needle accidentally pricked Namubiru’s finger; she stopped what she was doing, washed and bandaged her pricked finger, and returned to the child. She was eventually able to administer the injection.

Uncertain about whether the same needle was used throughout, the mother became concerned about the possibility that her child had been exposed to HIV. It was confirmed that Namubiru is HIV-positive and is on anti-retroviral drugs. The child was given an HIV test; the results were negative. A precautionary 2-month post-exposure prophylaxis regimen was initiated, after which the child will be re-tested.

Rosemary Namubiru was arrested in front of a bevy of journalists. She was held by the Criminal Investigations Department for four days before her first appearance in court. She was charged with attempted murder, which carries a sentence of up to life imprisonment, and remanded to Luzira National Prison to await trial. On February 7, 2014, she was denied bail and returned to prison to await trial. Minutes before the trail began on February 11, 2014, the prosecutor announced the charge would be changed to “negligent act likely to spread infection of disease.” With this new charge in place, the prosecutor began to call its witnesses, and the trial is ongoing.

Trial by media

Since the moment of her arrest, Rosemary Namubiru has been found guilty in the court of public opinion. Even though research has shown that the likelihood of HIV transmission from a needle puncture is miniscule––only 0.32% of those exposed to HIV through a subcutaneous puncture became infected––Namubiru has been singled out and vilified in the press because of her HIV-positive status.

Here are just a few of the libelous accusations that appeared in the media reports in the immediate aftermath of her arrest:

* An article with the headline “Killer nurse charged with attempted murder” went on to accuse Namubiru of “maliciously infecting her patients, mainly the children with her HIV positive blood.”

* Another claimed that she “drew her own HIV-infected blood and injected it into a two-year old child.”

* Shortly after Namubiru’s arrest, one article stated that police were “investigating allegations that the woman has been engaging in the act for a pretty long time.”

* An article that appeared in The Africa Report speculated about Namubiru’s mental state, calling her “the fiendish nurse” and claiming “the baby’s incessant cries drove her mad.”

* One journalist opined that “as police struggled to find an appropriate charge to punish such an evil act, it became clearer that our laws are inadequate to cover such emerging but deadly crimes.”

* An editorial about the case declared, “The majority of our doctors and nurses may well be great professionals, but it’s also true that among them are many people who do not harbour good intentions for one reason or another. These could be inherently evil-minded, bitter or mentally unstable.”

False and sensational accounts by irresponsible media can prejudice the outcomes of trials and violate the fundamental human rights of people living with HIV and AIDS. Section 28 of Uganda’s constitution guarantees that every person charged with a criminal offence shall “be presumed to be innocent until proved guilty.”

A miscarriage of justice

Even before the trial began, serious questions surfaced regarding Rosemary Namubiru’s ability to receive a fair hearing. From the spectacle of her arrest—recorded by media who were clearly alerted in advance–-to the baseless original charge of attempted murder, and the rush to trial before the defense could prepare, it is clear that this is a sensationalized case.

Throughout the process, there have been numerous violations of Rosemary Namubiru’s rights:

* According to Section 23(4)(b) of the Ugandan constitution, an accused person can only be held for up to 48 hours before a hearing. Namubiru was held for four days before her first court appearance.

* The prosecution argued against granting bail, stating that Namubiru poses a grave risk to the public, even though there is no evidence of intent to commit any crime.

* Namubiru had no lawyer present when police extracted a statement from her; she was unable to access legal counsel until she had been in detention for a week.

* The Prosecutor claimed on February 7, 2014 that the State had completed its investigation and was ready to proceed to trial. Namubiru’s lawyers had not yet seen the State’s evidence, and were informed that they would receive the file the day before the trial was slated to begin. Section 28 of Uganda’s constitution guarantees that every person charged with a criminal offence shall “be given adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his or her defence.”

What are the broader implications of this case?

HIV advocates fear that the Namubiru case could set a dangerous precedent, in terms of both the criminalization of HIV transmission and the treatment of people living with HIV and AIDS.

Many advocates worry that the case could be used to justify passing the proposed HIV Prevention and AIDS Control Bill 2010. The bill includes two overly-broad sections on the criminalization of HIV, as well as a number of other troubling provisions that would restrict the rights of persons living with HIV and AIDS. If the government moves to legislate the criminalization of HIV, specific groups—including pregnant women, who are easily identified within the chain of transmission—could be targeted for criminal charges. (For more on the proposed bill and its implications, please visit www.uganet.org).

AIDS-Free World unequivocally disagrees with the notion of having a separate criminal code for people who are HIV-positive. If a person attempts to do bodily harm to another, regardless of the means, the existing laws should apply. By creating laws that specifically criminalize HIV transmission, the courts place the emphasis on the person, rather than the crime.

The media frenzy created by this case illustrates the degree to which HIV stigma still exists. Many advocates warn that the introduction of HIV-specific laws would be a dramatic setback in efforts to eliminate discrimination, particularly in the workplace.

Expert global guidance on the criminalization of HIV transmission

In its landmark report, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law recommended that:

“To ensure an effective, sustainable response to HIV that is consistent with human rights obligations:

2.1. Countries must not enact laws that explicitly criminalise HIV…exposure. Where such laws exist, they are counterproductive and must be repealed.

2.2. Law enforcement authorities must not prosecute people in cases of HIV…exposure where no intentional or malicious HIV transmission has been proven to take place.

2.4. Countries may legitimately prosecute HIV transmission that was both actual and intentional, using general criminal law, but such prosecutions should be pursued with care and require a high standard of evidence and proof.

—–

Rosemary Namubiru is being supported by several advocacy and human rights organizations, including the International Community of Women Living with HIV, Eastern Africa (ICWEA), Uganda Network on Law, Ethics and HIV/AIDS (UGANET), The National Forum of People Living with HIV in Uganda and AIDS-Free World (NAFOPHANU), and by individual HIV advocates including Canon Gideon Byamugisha, Milly Katana, Major Rubaramira Ruranga.

Nigeria's anti-gay law, condemned by US, Britain and Canada, will harm HIV response, says UNAIDS

Local and international groups fighting AIDS warned on Tuesday that a new Nigerian law criminalizing same-sex marriage and gay organizations will jeopardize the fight against the deadly disease. Activist Dorothy Aken’Ova said the new legislation, already dubbed the “Jail the Gays” law, will endanger and even criminalize programs fighting HIV / AIDS in the gay community. Aken’Ova is executive director of Nigeria’s International Center for Reproductive Health and Sexual Rights based in Minna, Niger state.

The UN agency to fight AIDS and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria expressed “deep concern that access to HIV services for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people will be severely affected by the new law in Nigeria, further criminalizing LGBT people, organizations and activities, as well as people who support them.”

UNAIDS said the law could harm Jonathan’s own presidential initiative to fight AIDS, started a year ago. Nigeria has the second largest HIV epidemic globally, with an estimated 3.4 million people living with HIV. The disease affects many more gay men than heterosexuals, with 2010 statistics estimating national HIV prevalence at 4 percent compared to 17 percent among gay men, according to UNAIDS.

President Goodluck Jonathan’s spokesman confirmed Monday that he had signed the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act on Jan. 7, providing penalties of up to 14 years in jail for gay marriage and up to 10 years’ imprisonment for membership or encouragement of gay clubs, societies and organizations. The U.S., Britain and Canada have swiftly condemned the law, with Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that it “dangerously restricts freedom” of expression and association of all Nigerians.

Human rights activists reported that dozens of gay men were being arrested in northern Nigeria in an apparent response to the law. The law also criminalizes people and groups who support “the registration, operation and sustenance of gay clubs, societies and organizations, processions or meetings in Nigeria.” Those convicted could be jailed for 10 years.

Even before it was the passed, the law was being used to persecute gays, Aken’Ova said. In Bauchi state, she said police entrapped four gay men and tortured them into naming others. She said the police have drawn up a list of 168 wanted gay men, of whom 38 have been arrested recently. An AIDS counsellor told the Associated Press he helped get bail for the men. He spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear he would be arrested as well.

Jonathan, Nigeria’s president, has not publicly expressed his views on homosexuality. But his spokesman, Reuben Abati, told The Associated Press on Monday night, “This is a law that is in line with the people’s cultural and religious inclination. So it is a law that is a reflection of the beliefs and orientation of Nigerian people … Nigerians are pleased with it.”

UNAIDS releases handbook to enhance the capacity of the judiciary to address HIV-related legal and human rights issues

Judging the epidemic has been prepared as a resource to help judges, magistrates, arbitrators and other judicial officers throughout the world adjudicate cases involving HIV-related issues. This handbook may also be used by judicial trainers and ministries of justice to deliver educational programmes to judges and magistrates on legal issues related to HIV and human rights. It may also be relevant to advocates, lawyers and other legal practitioners, and civil society organisations (including people living with HIV) that seek to gain specific understanding of HIV-related legal issues and the potential role of the courts in advancing human rights in the context of the epidemic. Based on international legal and human rights standards, the handbook contains examples of decided cases from different jurisdictions, good-practice advice and judicial rulings on HIV-related issues.

Download the report

African HIV criminalisation achievements and challenges highlighted at ICASA 2013

The African continent has more countries with overly broad and vague HIV-specific laws relating to HIV non-disclosure, exposure and/or transmission than any other global region, nearly all of which have been enacted in the past decade.

Although North America is the continent with the most known prosecutions, 26 African countries have overly broad and/ or vague HIV-specific criminal laws with a further three countries considering new HIV-specific criminal laws. This is worrying and disappointing given the growing evidence base and consensus of international agencies that such laws are counterproductive to HIV prevention efforts and generally fail to deliver ‘justice’.

Although there are few known prosecutions the majority of those prosecuted have been women – who are usually the first in a couple to know their HIV status due to routine antenatal testing and who are often erroneously accused of bringing HIV into a relationship.

In addition, South Africa recently prosecuted alleged criminal HIV transmission as attempted murder despite no evidence of intent to harm. (Read the judgement from the High Court of South Africa on alleged HIV exposure being attempted murder here.)

However, there have been some positive legal changes brought about by local advocacy supported by international civil society and UN agencies. Since 2010, at least four countries – Congo, Guinea, Senegal and Togo – have revised their existing HIV-related legislation or adopted new legislation that restrict use of criminal law to cases of intentional transmission.

And more recently advocacy in Malawi and Nigeria has resulted in the removal of overly broad HIV-specific criminal statutes from draft omnibus HIV Bills.

View the poster below or download the A4 double-sided printable version of the poster here.

Advancing HIV Justice: Achievements and challenges in global advocacy against HIV criminalisation – African…

Ruins: Chronicle of an HIV Witch-hunt

(53 min, Zoe Mavroudi, Greece, 2013)

Director Zoe Mavroudi’s powerful exposition of how HIV stigma was cynically used to scapegoat society’s most vulnerable. The film explores what happened in the run-up to the country’s 2012 national elections when a group of HIV-positive women were detained by the Greek police, forcibly tested, charged with a felony, imprisoned and publicly exposed, when their mug shots and personal data were published in the media.

More information at: http://ruins-documentary.com/en/

To support the women in their legal fight for justice please visit: http://ruins-documentary.com/en/donate/