AIDS 2016: Intersectional approaches linking issues across areas of criminalisation have been key themes of AIDS 2016

Susana T. Fried – 22 July 2016

In a moment of global attacks on civil society, an intersectional approach linking issues across HIV, sexuality, adult consensual sex and bodily integrity is critical. Now, more than ever.

Every international AIDS conference seems to have a theme or two that picks up energy as it goes. For me, at the World AIDS Conference 2016 underway in Durban, this was the growing discussion about disastrous impact of criminal law. Of course, this isn’t a new issue – not at an international AIDS conference, nor in advocacy more generally. The 2012 Global Commission on HIV and the Law explored this in depth. However, at this AIDS conference there was a renewed energy behind it. In addition, there were a number of conversations that added a new twist, linking criminalisation of same sex conduct, sex work and HIV criminalisation to criminalisation of abortion.

For someone who stands with one leg in the women’s movement and another in the HIV movement, this was a welcome and long overdue conversation. We know the ways in which abusive laws and practices put sex workers, gay and other men who have sex with men, transgender women (there is still a dearth of data on HIV and transmen or lesbians and other women who have sex with women) and other marginalised groups at increased risk of contracting HIV and create serious and unmanageable barriers to accessing services and justice. We also know the ways in which governments use criminal laws not just to contain and regulate the lives of individuals, but they also use it to circumscribe the work of civil society organisations working on these issues.

Laws that criminalise adult consensual sex, non-heteronormative behavior and gender transgression are used to control (often in the name of “protection”), penalise and, as a result, stigmatise a range of sexual practices and sexual and gender identities that put health and rights at risk. Many of the groups who are on the receiving end of such punitive laws and practices are among those most at risk of contracting HIV. This conversation, despite massive evidence, still doesn’t always inform legislation and public policy. This is, in a sense, “old hat” to social movements across the board.

However, what was new to the conversation at this year’s International AIDS Conference (AIDS2016) in a visible way and in a public conversation was the introduction of criminalisation of abortion to the list of forms of criminalisation that intersect with HIV risk and vulnerability. At one panel, Lucinda O’Hanlon from the UN human rights office drew out some of the parallels between criminalisation of abortion and other forms of criminalisation, stating “Restrictive legal regimes on abortions, including criminalisation, do not reduce abortion rates but rather makes them unsafe. These restrictions are rooted in societal norms that deny women’s agency and capacity to make decisions about their own lives.” In many countries, women who undergo abortions are stigmatised as improper women, much like sex workers who, as Ruth Morgan Thomas noted “Criminalisation of sex work sends the message that sex workers are not seen as fit and worthy to enjoy rights.”

However, the linkages can be more direct. For example, transmen who have sex with other men and become pregnant may find it impossible to find safe and non-judgmental sexual and reproductive health care, let alone abortion services. Sex workers, too, may find their access to abortion services restricted because of the ripple effect of laws criminalising sex work. With abortion, as with other groups whose identities and practices are penalised, other factors of marginalisation matter. In the case of abortion, it is women with fewer resources who are at greatest risk of facing punishment for their choice. The same could be said for those who get penalised for living with HIV. For example, a young woman who has been coerced into having sex and fears that the man she had sex with might be living with HIV, will find it difficult in many countries, to have an abortion. In some countries, if she is under the age of consent for services, she will have to get parental consent just to be able to see a sexual and reproductive health practitioner. A limited number of countries ban abortions under any circumstances, even, in some cases, as a principle of their country’s constitution (Ecuador, for instance). Most countries allow abortion under some circumstances, but access the services requires money, information and the ability to travel. Such resource requirements have a particularly severe impact on young women, poor women, and women in marginalised groups. Failing to learn lessons from HIV, women, adolescents and girls in countries affected by Zika face similar barriers to services and justice.

In a cross-issue conversation, Edwin Bernard from the HIV Justice Network also noted a “shift towards intersectionality in our efforts to end the punitive and abusive laws against various populations,” including women who seek or undergo abortions. In this context, these conversations stand as a clarion call for a new or renewed effort to link forces to challenge the growing reliance on punitive laws and practices, including those about abortion, by governments to control those who step outside of social norms around gender and sexuality.

Originally published in Crosstalk

AIDS 2016: A workshop at the 21st International Aids Conference highlights the need for collaboration across key populations to defeat unjust criminal laws

21 JULY 2016

On 19 July, a workshop was hosted at the 21st International AIDS Conference, being held in Durban, South Africa. Entitled “Common at its core: understanding the linkages for challenging the impact of criminal law across population groups,” the workshop highlighted the common root causes of the misuse of criminal law against people living with HIV, sex workers and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people, as well as in the context of abortion.

The discussions noted that unjust criminal laws against those populations are due to prejudice, gender inequality and discrimination. The participants stressed that punitive laws against key populations lead to serious human rights violations, exacerbate vulnerabilities to HIV and other health issues and affect efforts to end AIDS.

To address unjust laws, the participants called for building synergies among populations affected by them. This will allow experience-sharing on successful approaches in addressing criminalization and will enable the development of joint strategies. Examples of collaborations between communities to address their common health and human rights challenges were highlighted.

The discussions were concluded with a call for more collaboration in addressing the criminal law and its impact on specific populations, including in the context of HIV. This should build on efforts to expand strategic litigation and the engagement of lawmakers, the police and the judiciary to end injustice and advance health for all.

The event was organized by UNAIDS, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Amnesty International and the Global Health Justice Partnership at Yale University.

QUOTES

“CRIMINALIZATION OF SEX WORK SENDS THE MESSAGE THAT SEX WORKERS ARE NOT SEEN AS FIT AND WORTHY TO ENJOY RIGHTS. SEX WORKERS EXPERIENCE SERIOUS FORMS OF VIOLENCE AND ABUSE, OFTEN COMMITTED BY POLICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENTS. THESE ABUSIVE LAWS AND PRACTICES VIOLATE HUMAN RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS.”

RUTH MORGAN THOMAS NETWORK OF SEX WORK PROJECTS

“RESTRICTIVE LEGAL REGIMES ON ABORTIONS, INCLUDING CRIMINALIZATION, DO NOT REDUCE ABORTION RATES BUT RATHER MAKE THEM UNSAFE. THESE RESTRICTIONS ARE ROOTED IN SOCIETAL NORMS THAT DENY WOMEN’S AGENCY AND CAPACITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT THEIR OWN LIVES.”

LUCINDA O’HANLON ADVISER ON WOMEN’S RIGHTS, OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

“AT ITS CORE, CRIMINALIZATION OF SPECIFIC POPULATIONS, INCLUDING LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL AND TRANSGENDER PEOPLE, IS BASED ON PREJUDICE, FEAR AND STIGMA. CRIMINAL LAWS AGAINST OUR POPULATIONS ARE AMBIGUOUS, UNJUST AND USED MAINLY AS POLITICAL AND SOCIAL TOOLS TO ENFORCE HETERONORMATIVE AND PATRIARCHAL NORMS. WE MUST JOIN HAND AND BUILD SYNERGIES AMONG OUR COMMUNITIES AND SOLIDARITY WITH OTHER SOCIAL JUSTICE MOVEMENTS TO CHALLENGE THESE LAWS.”

KENE ESOM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AFRICAN MEN FOR SEXUAL HEALTH AND RIGHTS

“THE BREAKTHROUGH AT THIS CONFERENCE IS THE SHIFT TOWARDS INTERSECTIONALITY IN OUR EFFORTS TO END THE PUNITIVE AND ABUSIVE LAWS AGAINST VARIOUS POPULATIONS. THIS EMERGING MOVEMENT SHOULD BE SUPPORTED AND STRENGTHENED AS CRITICAL TO ADVANCING EFFECTIVE RESPONSES FOR DIGNITY, HEALTH AND JUSTICE FOR KEY POPULATIONS.”

EDWIN BERNARD GLOBAL COORDINATOR, HIV JUSTICE NETWORK

Originally published on UNAIDS website

USA: Policy changes in Nevada will end the segregation of prison inmates living with HIV as well as implement new positive measures to end discrimination

By SCOTT SONNER

Associated Press

RENO, Nev. (AP) – Nevada’s Department of Corrections is changing a series of policies and practices that the U.S. Justice Department says illegally discriminate against prison inmates with HIV by housing them separately and denying access to work assignments that can speed their release.

The Justice Department concluded last month the state was violating inmates’ civil rights under the policies based largely on outdated and unfounded fears about the transmission of the virus that causes AIDS.

State Corrections Director James Dzurenda announced late Wednesday that inmates with HIV no longer will be segregated from the general prison population. He also said they will be provided the same opportunities as others to win assignments to work camps where they can earn credits faster to shorten their sentences.

Other changes include new protections intended to keep inmates’ HIV status confidential, and new training for inmates and prison workers alike about how HIV is transmitted.

HIV, the human immunodeficiency virus, causes AIDS. But it cannot be transmitted through ordinary activities such as shaking hands or sharing drinking glasses, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada who had complained to the Justice Department about the policies said they were impressed with the quick response by Dzurenda, who became the new corrections director in April.

“We are thrilled,” said Amy Rose, the group’s legal director in Las Vegas.

“It appears they took the recommendations from the Justice Department very seriously and took immediate corrective action,” Rose told The Associated Press. “This is good news for inmates who are currently suffering under the previous policy.”

Dzurenda said he has submitted a bill draft request to the Nevada Legislature to formalize some of the changes in state laws and regulations, and that additional changes may be forthcoming.

“The Department of Corrections is committed to a safe and human environment for each employee and inmate and will continue to review and revise other measures suggested” by the Justice Department, said Brooke Keast, the department’s public information officer.

“In an effort to decrease any negative expectations or fears on the part of non-HIV positive inmates given the new policies above, a pamphlet is being designed covering facts about HIV and the changes in policy at the NDOC,” she said.

Justice Department lawyers warned Nevada’s attorney general in a letter June 20 the state was violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. They said some inmates have been discriminated against – and in some cases threatened and harassed – as a result of the “medically unnecessary” segregation policy that stigmatizes those with HIV.

The federal agency launched an ADA compliance review after receiving complaints from the ACLU and two inmates at the High Desert State Prison in Indian Springs.

Under the new policies only limited medical personnel will have access to the identities of HIV positive inmates and that prison housing classification forms are being revised to eliminate the medical code typically associated with HIV status, Dzurenda said. If an inmate meets all the requirements for a work assignment, he or she will be considered like any other inmate, regardless of HIV status, he said.

Rose said she’s especially glad Dzurenda is submitting a bill draft request to amend the state statutes that conflict with the recommendations, and she hopes they will “continue to work toward educating inmates and staff about the real facts about HIV and the change in policy.”

AIDS 2016: Discriminatory laws and policies hinder access to HIV prevention, treatment, and care for the populations most at risk of HIV

At the 21st International AIDS Conference (AIDS 2016) in Durban, researchers and community representatives discussed the impact of discriminatory laws and policies in many parts of the world that hinder access to HIV prevention, treatment, and care for the populations most at risk of HIV infection — men who have sex with men, transgender people, sex workers, people who inject drugs, and prisoners.

The latest data from UNAIDS show that these vulnerable populations account for more than one-third of all new HIV infections globally. Compared to the general population: transgender people are 49 times more likely to be living with HIV; men who have sex with men and people who inject drugs are each 24 times more likely to become infected with HIV; sex workers are 10 times more likely to become infected; and prisoners are five times more likely to be living with HIV.

“We will not end AIDS without addressing the needs of the most vulnerable individuals and communities, yet far too many are currently being left behind,” said Chris Beyrer, AIDS 2016 International Chair and President of the International AIDS Society. “Protecting human rights is not just a moral issue, it is a scientific issue. Research presented at this conference will demonstrate that exclusion and discrimination help fuel the spread of HIV.”

Beyrer recently served on a special Johns Hopkins University-Lancet Commission on Drug Policy and Health. He was lead author of the Commission’s final report, published in March 2016 in advance of the UN Special Session on the World Drug Problem. The report concluded in part that drug laws intended to protect have instead contributed to disease transmission, discrimination, lethal violence, and forced displacement, and have undermined people’s right to health.

“Dealing effectively with HIV will require our communities and societies to break down longstanding prejudice, hatred, and ignorance,” said Justice Edwin Cameron of the Constitutional Court of South Africa. “Only when scientific advances are matched by social and cultural progress can this epidemic truly be contained.”

Originally published in Edge Media Network

AIDS 2016: The criminalization of vulnerable populations fuels the HIV epidemic in many countries

THE criminalization of same-sex relationships and prostitution in most parts of the continent has been cited as the major cause of the recurrence of HIV/AIDS in recent years.

After a period of decline, new HIV infections among adults across the globe are on the rise again, it has emerged at the International AIDS Conference in Durban, South Africa.

South Africa is the only African country legalise same-sex unions.

According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), HIV remains stubbornly high among men who have intercourse with men, sex workers, people who use drugs, and transgender women.

Groups like these, which are criminalized in many places, account for more than one-third of new HIV infections worldwide.

HRW Senior Researcher of Health and Human Rights, Megan McLemore, said criminalization restricted access to health care, forcing those most vulnerable to HIV to the margins of society.

“For the sake of populations most vulnerable to HIV, criminal laws need to be reformed, and fast. There is no time to waste,” said McLemore.

Meanwhile, a special issue of the Lancet medical journal released at the Durban conference described prisoners as the most neglected and vulnerable of all populations in the global HIV/AIDS response.

“Prison health care is abysmal in many parts of the world, and HIV prevention and treatment inside some jails is limited or nonexistent,” said McLemore.

Human Rights Watch has documented government failure to provide HIV prevention and treatment programs to prisoners, most recently in Louisiana parish jails.

Michel Sidibe, executive director at UNAIDS, said nearly 2 million people become HIV-positive every year.

Originally published in Caj News

AIDS 2016: HIV criminalisation is on the rise, report presenters at Beyond Blame preconference

HIV criminalisation on the rise, especially in sub-Saharan Africa

Lesley Odendal

Globally, 72 countries have adopted laws that specifically allow for HIV criminalisation, either because the law is specific to HIV, or because it names HIV as one (or more) of the diseases covered by a broader law. This total increases to 101 jurisdictions when the HIV criminalisation laws in 30 of the states that make up the United States are counted individually.

Prosecutions for HIV non-disclosure, potential or perceived exposure and/or unintentional transmission have now been reported in 61 countries. Of the 61 countries, 26 countries applied HIV criminalisation laws and 32 applied general criminal or public-health related laws, according to HIV Justice Worldwide, an international partnership of organizations, made up of the AIDS and Rights Alliance for Southern Africa (ARASA), the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, the Global Network of People Living with HIV, the HIV Justice Network, the International Community of Women Living with HIV, the Positive Women’s Network USA and the Sero Project. The findings were presented at the Beyond Blame preconference held at the 21st International AIDS Conference, in Durban, South Africa, this week.

HIV criminalisation refers to the unjust application of criminal law to people living with HIV, based on their HIV status, either through the use of HIV-specific criminal statutes or by applying general criminal laws that allow for the prosecution of unintentional HIV transmission, potential or perceived exposure to HIV – even where HIV is not transmitted – and/or the non-disclosure of known HIV-positive status.

“HIV criminalisation is profoundly bad policy. It is based on fear and outdated understanding of HIV risk and harm and magnifies stigma and discrimination towards people living with HIV,” said Justice Edwin Cameron, judge of the South Africa Constitutional Court.

These laws are not guided by the scientific and medical evidence relating to the transmission mechanisms of HIV, fail to uphold the principles of legal and judicial fairness (such as foreseeability, intent, causality and proof) and directly infringe the human rights of those involved in these cases.

“The evidence that criminalisation as a public health strategy does not work is too plain to contest. It is our responsibility to end it”, said Hon. Patrick Herminie, Speaker of the National Assembly of Seychelles.

To date, thirty countries in sub-Saharan Africa have passed laws criminalising HIV transmission or exposure in some form, including Botswana, Cote d’Ivoire, Nigeria and Uganda, which passed laws in the last year. There has also been a rise in reported prosecutions in sub-Saharan Africa since 2015, in Botswana, South Africa, Uganda and especially Zimbabwe.

An additional workshop at the conference explored the common roots of criminalisation. Panelists identified the key reasons for these misused and often overly-broad interpretations of criminal laws as being due to fear, moral panic, containment of the HIV epidemic and state-sponsored control of bodily autonomy, including sexual conduct and stigma to impose sanctions on those viewed as not being ‘fit and worthy’ of enjoying the protectionist mandate of these laws.

Pervasive gender inequality, power dynamics, and ‘victim-status’ were acknowledged as preventing women from accessing justice to the same extent as men. It was recommended that a feminist framework is used as a strategy to address the criminalisation of HIV as female and transgender sex workers, migrants, indigenous and black women suffer the most from these HIV-specific laws.

Rosemary Namiburu, an ex-nurse from Uganda, who was imprisoned after she was prosecuted for not revealing her HIV status to her partner is an example of this: “My life will not be the same after facing HIV criminalisation. My 30 years of working as a nurse and dedicated to saving lives have been erased. I have spent almost a year in prison and have been branded as a criminal and a killer, even though I have harmed no one.”

Originally published in aidsmap.com

AIDS 2016: Criminal laws need to be reformed for the sake of populations most vulnerable to HIV

Durban – The war on HIV and Aids could be stymied by the unequal application of criminal laws.

This was the consensus of a group of researchers at a session at the International Aids Conference titled “Beyond blame: A feminist dialogue on criminalisation of HIV transmission, exposure and non-disclosure”, which looked at misapplication of the laws of certain countries and their impact on the epidemic.

“The law is a critical tool for creating an enabling environment for effective responses to HIV and to provide access to justice for those affected by HIV. While some have argued in favour of laws criminalising HIV exposure, transmission or non-disclosure as protective of women, they in fact leave them more vulnerable to persecution and increased violence,” said organisers in their introduction.

Marama Pala, a New Zealand activist who was infected 24 years ago, said when the trial against the man who had infected her began, she was painted as the victim. And because she was seen as “criminalising” the spread of HIV, she was ostracised by those living with the virus.

“I was only 22. I didn’t have an education. People would look at me and say: ‘Poor girl’. Everyone called me a victim. But I’m not.”

She said that experience, and many more, had convinced her that this approach did not work and instead became another way to abuse human rights.

“As an indigenous woman (she is Maori) I know how people of colour are always the ones to be disproportionately affected by laws like this one.”

Members of the LGBTI community and prostitutes were also targeted. This point was raised by Jules Kim, a prostitute at Scarlet Alliance, an Australian association, who said that a trans-woman prostitute was now facing charges and was being held in a men’s maximum security prison.

“No white men have been arrested under these laws, unless they are sex workers. Even if a person has been on ARVs for years (meaning that their viral load has been suppressed and they cannot pass on the virus), they are still arrested and face criminal charges.”

She said everyone had a responsibility to protect their sexual health.

Ruth Morgan Thomas, global co-ordinator of the Global Network of Sex Work Projects, said these laws were based on “family values”.

“The custodians of the law – the police – are the ones who are sometimes perpetrators of the violence. If you report a rape, they tell you that that can’t be possible, because you’re a whore.”

Men who had sex with men also bore the brunt of those laws.

Originally published on iol

Uganda: Civil societies challenge HIV criminalisation

KAMPALA – “Whereas the law might have potential to positively contribute to the current HIV/AIDS response efforts in Uganda, there are some contentious clauses that could deter all the benefits realized in the fight against the scourge.”

This is what activists and people living with HIV are saying.

The HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act came into effect on July 31, 2014 when President Yoweri Museveni assented to it. But people living with HIV, together with civil society organizations, say it presents a challenge for the human rights of infected people and also undermines several critical issues.

The salient features that are scanned out in the law are: Clauses 41 and 43 of the Act that provide for prosecution on grounds of attempted and intentional transmission of HIV, respectively. Among the provisions of the piece of legislation is criminal penalty for risk and intentional transmission of the virus.

The Act would require mandatory disclosure of one’s HIV status, failure of which would be regarded as “criminal”, and attempting to or, intentionally transmitting the virus.

Failure to use a condom where one knows their HIV status would constitute a criminal offence, making them liable for prosecution.

The Civil Society HIV/AIDS Bill Coalition has been lobbying members of parliament to change the clauses in the Act that are construed to create negative effects in the national response to HIV/AIDS, but lawmakers have been adamant about the issue.

It is against this background that people living with HIV under their umbrella organization the National Forum of People Living with HIV & AIDS Networks in Uganda (NAFOPHANU) together with Uganda Network on Law Ethics and HIV/AIDS (UGANET) and the International Community of Women living with HIV Eastern Africa (ICWEA recently petitioned the constitutional court to review the Act and amend the contentious clauses (41, 43 and 18).

“Honestly, if proven, such behavior cannot go unpunished. The question however is ‘How can it be proven that indeed the HIV of the accuser was got from the accused?’ There is fear that public knowledge of one’s HIV positive status would be used against them due to personal differences,” says Lillian Mworeko (pictured immediately below), regional coordinator for ICWEA.

She argues that this will ultimately discourage people from testing to know their status fearing that if found positive, their status could be used against them in courts of law at any point in time.

It should thus be noted that one who does not know their status cannot be held liable under this law.

“We should avoid creating scenarios where people living with HIV/AIDS are looked at as criminals or potential criminals,” warns Dora Musinguzi, executive director of UGANET.

Eventually, she adds, people will inadvertently live with the virus without accessing treatment and by the time they get to know their status it will be too late.

Stella Kentutsi, the executive director of NAFOPHANU, regrets that these clauses seem to target those already openly living with HIV and as such will affect disclosure, fuel stigma and discrimination thus increasing new infections and affecting access to already available services.

“To this effect, HIV infections and deaths will escalate thus watering down all the achievements so far attained in the fight against HIV. Partner and third party notification in clause 18(2) (e) is likely to breed domestic violence as a health worker is given a right to disclose to a partner without a client’s consent. It also infringes on the right to privacy as per our constitution- Article 27,” Kentutse. –

n their petition, the concerned groups give eight strong points on which they base their ground.

1. The law when enacted will drive people underground

In the face of possible prosecution and forced disclosure, most people will hide away; there would be no reason to take an HIV test in fear of prosecution.

2. It shall be counter-productive

As people shun HIV services and treatment for all possible fears that arise with the provisions of the law, prevention and control cannot be achieved.

3. Taking an HIV test is the beginning point for both control and prevention, however the ACT will deter this effort by empowering medical practitioners to release test results to third parties.

4. It will indiscriminately harass women

Most women get to know their HIV status before their male counterparts as they interface with medical facilities more often. Giving them an extra burden to disclose their status mandatory as a blanket requirement may subject them to violence, abandonment and abuse as they are usually blamed for bringing the virus. In our societies, women cannot easily negotiate sex nor condom use, yet failure to use one while they know their status will warrant such a woman punishment for intentional transmission of the HIV virus.

5. May breakdown families who are already vulnerable

Opening a window for prosecution will encourage family breakdowns where one partner who gets to know their status, blames it on the other and files a case in court. Intentional transmission may never get proved, but the family structure will have been distorted, partners desert each other with the consequent burden born by the poor orphans. HIV status is bad enough for the children but humiliating and sometimes vicious litigation between parents tears their lives apart.

6. Is not situation-specific or realistic

The conditions for this ACT to operate are not realistic, it is extremely difficult to prove who infected the other and therefore it is to no effect. The judiciary in this country is very much strained and it takes long to pass judgment. How many lives would be destroyed if it takes an average five to seven years to get judgment? Worse, the Police force is ineffective and is known to fail to comprehend and prosecute cases of this nature.

7. Selective prosecution

The ACT targets the 20% of Ugandans that have tested and know their status and presumes that some of those knowingly and intentionally transmit HIV. What about the rest of the population who do not know their status yet transmit and cannot be found in the ambit of this ACT? This is unfair, obnoxious and unreasonable and cannot possibly be regarded as an efficacious law.

8. Increased stigma and discrimination

The moment HIV is construed with criminalization and then people go into hiding, those living with HIV will suffer societal victimization since they would now be regarded as threats to public health. As a nation, we can still do better since on this one, we are all in it together.

Originally published in New Vision

AIDS 2016: UNAIDS reports on HIV JUSTICE WORLDWIDE's Beyond Blame pre-conference

On 17 July, some 200 people living with HIV, human rights activists and representatives of key populations gathered for a one-day meeting on challenging HIV criminalization under the title “Beyond blame: challenging HIV criminalization.” The event, a preconference meeting before the 21st International AIDS Conference, being held in Durban, South Africa, was organized by HIV Justice Worldwide, an international partnership of organizations, including the AIDS and Rights Alliance for Southern Africa, the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, the Global Network of People Living with HIV, the HIV Justice Network, the International Community of Women Living with HIV, the Positive Women’s Network USA and the Sero Project.

The event was an opportunity for people working to end unjust HIV criminalization in all regions of the world to share recent developments, successful approaches and challenges. It also mobilized participants on the urgency to address unjust HIV criminalization as a violation of human rights and serious barrier to efforts to scale up HIV prevention, treatment and care services.

The meeting heard individuals who have face HIV criminalization recount the far-reaching personal, social and legal impacts of unjust prosecution on their lives and that of their families. Lawyers and civil society activists who have led successful efforts against HIV criminalization, including in Australia, Canada, Kenya, Sweden and the United States of America, shared their experiences and approaches. HIV scientists and clinicians were called upon to become more involved in efforts to ensure that the application of the criminal law is consistent with best available evidence relating to risk, harm and proof in the context of HIV. Similarly, members of parliament and the judiciary were highlighted as key stakeholders whose understanding and engagement is central to efforts to end unjust HIV criminalization.

QUOTES

“HIV-RELATED PROSECUTIONS ARE BECOMING INCREASINGLY COMMONPLACE. THE EVIDENCE THAT CRIMINALIZATION AS A PUBLIC HEALTH STRATEGY DOES NOT WORK IS TOO PLAIN TO CONTEST. IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO END IT.”

PATRICK HERMINIE SPEAKER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF SEYCHELLES

“HIV CRIMINALIZATION IS PROFOUNDLY BAD POLICY. IT IS BASED ON FEAR AND OUTDATED UNDERSTANDING OF HIV RISK AND HARM. CRIMINALIZATION MAGNIFIES STIGMA AND DISCRIMINATION TOWARDS PEOPLE LIVING WITH HIV. PEOPLE LIVING WITH HIV HAVE BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF EFFORTS TO END UNJUST CRIMINALIZATION AND SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR THEIR COURAGE AND COMMITMENT TO JUSTICE.”

JUSTICE EDWIN CAMERON JUDGE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

“MY LIFE WILL NOT BE THE SAME AFTER FACING HIV CRIMINALIZATION. MY 30 YEARS WORKING AS A NURSE AND DEDICATED TO SAVING LIVES HAVE BEEN ERASED. I HAVE SPENT ALMOST A YEAR IN PRISON. I HAVE BEEN BRANDED A CRIMINAL AND A KILLER EVEN THOUGH I HAVE HARMED NO ONE.”

ROSEMARY NAMUBIRU UGANDAN NURSE

Originally published by UNAIDS

AIDS 2016: HIV Criminalisation activists take over the stage at Durban AIDS Conference opening ceremony

Following Justice Edwin Cameron’s Jonathan Mann Memorial Lecture at AIDS 2016 in Durban, more than 100 activists took to the stage demanding an end to HIV criminalisation. Among us – people with HIV, sex workers, and other criminalised people – were allies that included Elizabeth Taylor’s grandchildren (and great-grandchild): Laela Wilding, Finn McMurray, Rhys Tivey, and Quinn Tivey. Our chant: WE HAVE A VIRUS! WE ARE NOT CRIMINALS! END CRIMINALISATION NOW! Justice Cameron welcomed us with open arms, literally!