US: Florida courts still waiting for Supreme Court decision on whether sex between same sex couples is actually intercourse under Florida statutes

It has been two years since the state’s highest court held legal arguments about the validity of a 1986 statute requiring HIV-positive people to reveal their infection before having “sexual intercourse.”

The case involves a man charged with a felony after failing to tell his male sex partner that he carries the human immunodeficiency virus. There’s the rub.

The legal issue before the court is . Really. That’s because of the way the law was written a hundred years ago, and now courts in different parts of Florida have disagreed on its application.

“In the history of Florida law the specific term, sexual intercourse has always been interpreted only to mean reproductive sexual conduct,” Gary De Baun’s lawyer argued.

Therefore, he claimed his client’s conviction should thus be reversed; that he did not violate the law as written, because it only applies to sexual conduct between a man and a woman.

Florida courts have disagreed, and the legal issue is before the Supreme Court for resolution. But it has been for a long while. It was argued on Feb. 4, 2015, and the court has still not ruled. Meanwhile, until the highest court of this case decides this case, prosecutors in multiple counties are reaching conflicting decisions.

The record in this case shows that Debaun’s partner asked him to take an HIV test, and that Debaun, who knew that he was infected, gave his partner fake test results, showing he was free of the virus that causes AIDS. A lower court threw out the charge, but it was reinstated on appeal. So until the court decides, Debaun lives in limbo.

Debaun’s lawyers are saying that since the legislature has failed to define intercourse as anything but sex between a man and a woman, the disclosure requirement cannot be applied to same-sex couples. If the court agrees, the case would be dismissed- if the court ever rules.

At the time, Justice Pariente criticized the legislature for its inaction, remarking “this issue could be solved easily by them.”

An experienced court watcher in Tallahassee told SFGN that cases “generally don’t take this long to decide. One of the moving parties should prod the court for a ruling.”

It’s ironic the delay has taken so long, because on April 7, 2014, the Florida Supreme Court designated this as a “high profile case of significant public and media interest.”

Well, apparently not that significant. We will see soon.

Published in FSGN on February 14, 2017

Canada: Community organisations in Ontario call for an immediate moratorium on all prosecutions and sound prosecutorial guidelines

Stop the witch-hunt of HIV criminalization

People living with HIV are being charged with some of the most serious offences in our criminal law, even in situations where there has been no transmission of HIV, no realistic possibility of transmission, and no intent to transmit.

Witch-hunts aren’t always sudden social paroxysms. They can be pursued slowly and with a veneer of legality — a steady erosion of rights and decency tapping into, and reinforcing deep-rooted fear, stigma and prejudice. Their harm isn’t limited solely to the injustices meted out to those directly targeted; they cast a broader shadow over entire communities.

It’s what’s happening here, courtesy of the provincial Ministry of the Attorney General that has so far refused to recognize both science and human rights when it comes to prosecutions for alleged nondisclosure of HIV.

People living with HIV are being charged with some of the most serious offences in our criminal law (such as “aggravated sexual assault”), even in situations where there has been no transmission of HIV, no realistic possibility of transmission, and no intent to transmit.

Simply put, they are being criminalized for having HIV, caught up in a justice system, from policing to prosecution to prison, that too often disregards evidence and the public interest.

(After the recent incident involving a Toronto police officer talking nonsense about how “AIDS” can be transmitted, it’s clear there is much work to be done on the policing front, too. Scientific consensus is that there is zero risk of HIV transmission through spit and a vanishingly minuscule possibility of transmission through a bite. At least scientifically speaking, we’re not in 1984.)

For many years, a group of committed people living with HIV, lawyers, academics and other advocates has called on the attorney general to put an end to this overly broad use of the criminal law.

In particular, this coalition has urged the adoption of sound guidelines for prosecutors to appropriately limit the use of criminal charges. Repeatedly, it has denounced problematic prosecutions that continue in Ontario — prosecutions accompanied by media coverage that, according to a recent study, disproportionately features black and/or immigrant men and often reflects racist stereotypes. Repeatedly, the coalition has suggested remedies for this ongoing injustice, drawing on a province-wide consultation.

But successive attorneys general have been unable or unwilling to rein in overzealous prosecutors, and have failed to develop prosecutorial guidance in line with science and numerous international recommendations.

As it stands, a so-called “HIV experts group” of crown prosecutors within the ministry now runs this horrible show in Ontario, leading the charge against people living with HIV. From the outside, we don’t know the group’s composition or how they make their decisions to pursue a particular prosecution.

Community organizations have requested a meeting. So, too, have scientific experts — who have pointed out that a correctly used latex condom is 100 per cent effective in blocking passage of HIV, as well as the science now establishing that someone with an undetectable viral load (including as a result of effective treatment with anti-HIV drugs) is effectively non-infectious. Yet this group of “HIV expert” prosecutors has not responded.

However, recent reports in the Star revealed an infamous guide for prosecuting cases of HIV nondisclosure, developed by Hamilton crown attorney Karen Shea — who has played an active role in advancing such cases around the province — for use by other prosecutors. (The government was ordered to release this document after years of wrangling in court.)

A Ministry spokesperson admitted the guide takes a “prosecution at all costs” approach and “doesn’t take into consideration the kinds of situations in which a more lenient approach might be justified.”

It is therefore no surprise that we continue to see the misuse of charges of aggravated sexual assault, a criminal offence usually reserved for the most violent rapes, even in cases of consensual sex where there was negligible or no risk of HIV transmission, no actual transmission and no intent to transmit.

Such prosecutions damage individual lives and public health. As stated last month by Canada’s federal justice minister, “… the over-criminalization of HIV nondisclosure discourages many individuals from being tested and seeking treatment, and further stigmatizes those living with HIV or AIDS.”

Enough is enough. Attorney General Yasir Naqvi — and Premier Wynne herself, who expressed her concern to us in-person three years ago — must stop this witch-hunt. More than 500 letters of concern have, as of this week, been sent to both by outraged community members.

We need an immediate moratorium on all prosecutions (except in those very rare cases of intentional transmission), and we need sound prosecutorial guidelines that respect science and human rights.

Richard Elliott is the executive director of the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, a member of the Ontario Working Group on Criminal Law and HIV Exposure. Stephen Lewis is board chair of the Stephen Lewis Foundation and co-director of AIDS-Free World, an international advocacy organization.

Published in The Star on February 8, 2017

US: Bill introduced in California to modernise outdated laws criminalising HIV

Sen. Scott Wiener and Assembly member Todd Gloria Announce Bill to Modernize Discriminatory HIV Criminalization Laws

APLA Health and other organizations join in support of bill to reform outdated laws that have not been updated since the 1980s and ‘90s

Today, California Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assembly member Todd Gloria (D-San Diego) introduced a bill to modernize laws that criminalize and stigmatize people living with HIV. Assembly member David Chiu is also a co-author of the bill, SB 239. SB 239 would amend California’s HIV criminalization laws, enacted in the 1980s and ’90s at a time of fear and ignorance about HIV and its transmission, to make them consistent with laws involving other serious communicable diseases.

The bill is co-sponsored by: APLA Health, the ACLU of California, Black AIDS Institute, Equality California, Lambda Legal, and Positive Women’s Network – USA. The organizations are part of Californians for HIV Criminalization Reform (CHCR), a coalition of people living with HIV, HIV and health service providers, civil rights organizations, and public health professionals dedicated to ending the criminalization of HIV in California. San Francisco Supervisor Jeff Sheehy also attended the announcement.

“These laws are discriminatory, not based in science, and detrimental to our HIV prevention goals,” Sen. Wiener says. “They need to be repealed. During the 1980s—the same period when some proposed quarantining people with HIV—California passed these discriminatory criminal laws and singled out people with HIV for harsher punishment than people with other communicable diseases. It’s time to move beyond stigmatizing, shaming, and fearing people who are living with HIV. It’s time to repeal these laws, use science-based approaches to reduce HIV transmission (instead of fear-based approaches), and stop discriminating against our HIV-positive neighbors.”

SB 239 updates California law to approach transmission of HIV in the same way as transmission of other serious communicable diseases. It also brings California statutes up to date with the current understanding of HIV prevention, treatment, and transmission. Specifically, it eliminates several HIV-specific criminal laws that impose harsh and draconian penalties, including for activities that do not risk exposure or transmission of HIV. It would make HIV subject to the laws that apply to other serious communicable diseases, thereby removing discrimination and stigma for people living with HIV, and maintaining public health.

“It’s time for California to reevaluate the way it thinks about HIV and to reduce the stigma associated with the disease,” Assemblymember Gloria says. “Current state law related to those living with HIV is unfair because it is based on the fear and ignorance of a bygone era. With this legislation, California takes an important step to update our laws to reflect the medical advances which no longer make a positive diagnosis equal to a death sentence.”

“These laws are outdated and only serve to fuel the spread of HIV in our communities. They also disproportionately impact people of color and women,” APLA Health CEO Craig E. Thompson says. “Our understanding of HIV has changed significantly since the 1980s and our laws need to change to reflect that. Updating these laws will reduce stigma and prevent people from going to prison simply because they are living with a chronic disease. We appreciate the leadership of Senator Wiener and Assemblymember Gloria on this critical social justice issue.”

In addition to the organizations co-sponsoring the bill, other CHCR members supporting the legislation include the Los Angeles LGBT Center, the Los Angeles HIV Law and Policy Project, the Transgender Law Center, Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Free Speech Coalition, Sex Workers Outreach Project, and Erotic Service Providers Legal, Education, and Research Project.

Published on February 7, 2017 in AplaHealth

Canada: Prosecuting HIV: Is it a crime to have sex without disclosing? Public Roundtable in Toronto – Ontario on Feb 3, 2017

Public Roundtable on February 3, 2017 – Prosecuting HIV: Is it a crime to have sex without disclosing?

Posted on January 30, 2017

Prosecuting HIV: Is it a crime to have sex without disclosing? public roundtable discussion will take place:

Friday February 3^rd, 2017, from 3:30 pm to 5:30 pm

Canadiana Gallery – Room 160, 14 Queen’s Park Crescent West, Toronto, Ontario

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that when HIV+ people do not disclose their status to sex partners they are committing a serious crime (often, aggravated sexual assault) if there is a realistic possibility of HIV transmission. Many HIV+ people have been prosecuted and jailed even if their sex partners did not contract HIV. Efforts are now underway to use prosecutorial guidelines and other tools to make Canada’s criminal law less punitive towards HIV+ people, and updated information on these efforts will be presented at the panel.

Roundtable Panelists will include:

Maureen Owino, Director, Committee for Accessible AIDS Treatment
Ryan Peck, Executive Director, HIV&AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario (HALCO)
Amy Swiffen, Sociology Department, Concordia University, and Visiting Professor at the Centre for Criminology & Sociolegal Studies
Chris Tatham, Sociology Department, University of Toronto

The Panel Moderator is Audrey Macklin, Director, Centre for Criminology & Sociolegal Studies.

All are welcome to attend.

The event poster is available as a pdf on our website: http://www.halco.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/HIV-disclosure-public-roundtable-2017Feb3.pdf.

Canada: Preliminary discussions said to be underway to review current practices in HIV non-disclosure cases

Advocates eager for feds to review ‘over-criminalizing’ of HIV non-disclosure

Joanna Smith, The Canadian Press

Published Wednesday, December 28, 2016 11:50AM EST

OTTAWA — Marjorie Schenkels had unprotected sex three times with a friend, while they both had been drinking, as she was going through a difficult and volatile time in her life.

The Manitoba woman was also living with HIV — a diagnosis she had told only her mother about — and feared she would lose her friends if they, including the man she was having sex with, found out.

She also did not tell the man she had sex with those three times, and he also later tested positive for HIV, although the question of where he contracted it is a matter of contention.

A jury convicted Schenkels of aggravated sexual assault in December 2014.

She did not lie, or manipulate or exploit, the sentencing judge from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba wrote in the Mar. 1 decision that includes the details of her story.

“Rather, her silence was the result of fear and inability to accept the gravity of her situation,” the judge wrote as she sentenced Schenkels, who is now also a registered sex offender, to two years in prison less a day.

Schenkels is appealing her conviction, with arguments being heard Jan. 10.

There is no particular provision in the Criminal Code regarding the disclosure of HIV status, but there are certain circumstances in which failing to do so is a crime.

That can include having consensual sex — something the Liberal government is now open to changing.

“The over-criminalization of HIV non-disclosure discourages many individuals from being tested and seeking treatment, and further stigmatizes those living with HIV or AIDS,” Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould said in a statement published online Dec. 1, which was World AIDS Day.

“Just as treatment has progressed, the criminal justice system must adapt to better reflect the current scientific evidence on the realities of this disease,” she wrote.

The statement said Wilson-Raybould would be taking a closer look at how the criminal justice system deals with non-disclosure of HIV status, which could include reviewing current practices on laying charges and going ahead with prosecutions, as well as developing prosecutorial guidelines.

The justice department did not make anyone available for an interview, but spokesman Ian McLeod said in an email that preliminary discussions are underway.

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the consent someone gives to engaging in sexual activity can be considered null and void if the accused person failed to disclose, or lied about, his or her HIV status.

The Crown must also prove the person would not have consented to sex if he or she had been aware of the HIV status.

That can lead to a charge of aggravated sexual assault — the most commonly applied, although there have been others — so long as the sexual contact has either transmitted the virus to the complainant, or put them at significant risk of contracting it.

The high court clarified in 2012 that this would not apply if someone is using a condom and also has a “low viral load,” but advocates argue the law has fallen far behind the science and creates more problems than it attempts to solve.

The fact that HIV non-disclosure falls under aggravated sexual assault or other offences makes statistics harder to come by than they are for other crimes, but the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network has counted at least 180 people charged for offences related to HIV non-disclosure in Canada since 1989.

This relatively high number of prosecutions — and the fact that the issue is criminalized at all — has brought Canada under scrutiny on the world stage.

In July, Justice Edwin Cameron of the Constitutional Court of South Africa shamed Canada — alongside Zimbabwe — for its approach to the issue in his keynote address at the International AIDS Conference in Durban.

“I ask all Canadians to share the blame — not just us in Africa,” he said to resounding applause.

Canadian Health Minister Jane Philpott was in the room.

The changes the Liberal government ends up proposing will likely face some opposition over the ethical challenges surrounding the issues of disclosure in intimate relationships.

“I recognize that it’s difficult, but I think it’s important to draw some lines into when the criminal law is actually warranted and not warranted,” said Cecile Kazatchkine, a senior policy analyst with the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network.

The United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) has recommended prosecuting only those people who knowingly and intentionally transmit the virus to their partners, rather than simply not disclosing it, which some advocates say is not always possible, such as in abusive relationships.

Cynthia Fromstein, a Toronto-based defence lawyer who has represented clients facing HIV disclosure-related charges, said there is still “enormous” ignorance and fear surrounding HIV, which is only made worse by the current laws.

“The only time you see HIV, practically, is when someone’s picture is on the paper, being charged . . . with aggravated sexual assault,” said Fromstein.

Published in CTV News on Dec 28, 2016

El Salvador: New law for the prevention and control of HIV includes duty to disclose HIV-status to all sexual partners

English translation ((Para artículo en español, desplácese hacia abajo)

People who are HIV positive and who want to maintain a permanent or eventual relationship with their partner, should inform them of their status as a carrier of the virus, as established by a new law in the country.

The Legislative Assembly approved in the plenary session, Wednesday of this week, the new Law on Prevention and Control of Infection caused by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

The regulations were described by the Atlacatl Vivo Positivo Association as “a setback” in defending the human rights of HIV positive people. In the section that refers to the duty to communicate, article 15, third paragraph of the law states that “any person who has been notified of his / her serological condition is obliged to communicate this situation to his / her partner, whether permanent or casual,”

The director of the Atlacatl Association, Odir Miranda, said that the law is criminalizing people who HIV positive “because it is forcing us to reveal that we are HIV positive; The other is that I can accuse a person and say that she infected me and I have no way to prove whether it was her or someone else “Miranda said.

He added that another disadvantage to which the new regulations exposes them is that by forcing them to say they have the virus, they are not likely to obtain housing, life insurance and hardly likely to get jobs, he explained

That aspect of the law is very serious, says Miranda, because they can not be exposed to regulations that, instead of helping to defend the human rights of HIV-positive people, will criminalize them, he said.

The Atlacatl Association criticized the fact that the body governing the regulation is the Ministry of Health, as embodied by article 3 of the new law. Miranda questions this because, according to him, The Ministry of Health is judge and part with its functions.

He added that the state portfolio, as the lead agency, will not be impartial when imposing sanctions for complaints against discrimination in the hospitals of the public network and the Salvadoran Institute of Social Security.

“There are many complaints of discrimination that we have put against hospitals and so far nothing has been done,” Miranda said.

In practice the law is nothing new, what’s more, it would better if it was repealed because it rights woudd be better, he said.

The only thing that the Public Health Commission of the Legislative Assembly did with the new legislation, then approved by the plenary, was to empower the Ministry of Health and change the name of the National Commission against AIDS (Conasida) to the National Commission Against HIV (Conavih).

According to him, the law has wanted to sell itself as a human rights approach, but it does not have it because they have left out the Ministry of Labor and Education, who are part of the main bodies in the national response to HIV.

The National HIV Commission is made up of the Ministry of Health, the Higher Public Health Council (CSSP), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Office of the Procurator for the Defense of Human Rights (PDDH), the Associations and Foundations whose objective is prevention of The Medical School, the Ministry of Social Inclusion and the National Institute of Youth.

When discussing the draft law that was approved on Wednesday, the Atlacatl Association proposed that the governing body be an institution detached from the Ministry of Health because the approach they sought was a multisectoral participation with the Attorney General’s Office, and the Supreme Court, among others.

With this framework of disadvantage, according to Miranda, they will ask the President of the Republic, Salvador Sánchez Cerén, to veto the new law because it gives a negative message to the country in response to HIV.

Miranda called the regulations a delay to what has been achieved in terms of fighting and responding to the disease. “We will target activities towards the Presidential House so that it does not sanction it,” he said. He even said that they could go to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to denounce the law.

————————————————————————————————–

Portadores de VIH obligados a decir su condición a su pareja sexual

La Asamblea legislativa aprobó la nueva Ley de Prevención y Control de la Infección provocada por el Virus de Inmunodeficiencia. La ley aún debe ser sancionada por el presidente de la República, Salvador Sánchez Cerén.

Por Roberto Alas

Las personas que se encuentren con el Virus de Inmunodeficiencia Humana (VIH) y que quieran mantener una relación permanente o eventual con su pareja, deberá informarle su condición de portador del virus, según ha quedado establecido en una nueva ley del país.

La Asamblea Legislativa aprobó en la sesión plenaria, del miércoles de esta semana, la nueva Ley de Prevención y Control de la Infección provocada por el Virus de Inmunodeficiencia Humana.

La normativa fue calificada por la Asociación Atlacatl Vivo Positivo como “un retroceso” en la defensa de los derechos humanos de estas personas. En el apartado que se refiere al Deber de comunicar, el artículo 15 inciso tercero de la normativa establece que “toda persona que haya sido notificada de su condición serológica, está obligada a comunicarle tal situación a su pareja, ya sea permanente o eventual”, expone.

El director de la Asociación Atlacatl, Odir Miranda, aseguró que la ley está criminalizando a las personas con VIH positivo “porque nos está obligando a revelar que somos VIH positivo; lo otro es que yo puedo acusar a una persona y decir que me infectó y no tengo la manera de probar si fue ella u otra”, expuso Miranda.

Agregó que otra de las desventajas en la que los expone la nueva normativa es que al obligarlos a decir que tienen el virus, no son sujetos a obtener viviendas, un seguro de vida y difícilmente les dan empleo, explicó

Ese aspecto dentro de la ley es muy grave, dice Miranda, porque no pueden exponerse a tener una normativa que, en vez de ayudar a la defensa de los Derechos Humanos de las personas VIH positiva, va a criminalizarlos, aseguró.

La Asociación Atlacatl criticó que el ente rector de la normativa sea el Ministerio de Salud, tal como quedó plasmado en el artículo 3 de la nueva ley. Mirando cuestiona ese hecho porque, según él, el Salud es juez y parte dentro de sus funciones.

Agregó que la cartera estatal, como organismo rector, no será imparcial al momento de imponer sanciones por denuncias contra discriminación en los hospitales de la red pública y del Instituto Salvadoreño del Seguro Social.

“Existen muchas denuncias de discriminación que hemos puesto contra los hospitales y hasta ahora no se ha hecho nada”, lamentó Miranda.

Pare él, prácticamente la ley no tiene nada nuevo, es más, estaba mejor la que fue derogada porque les garantizaba mejor sus derechos, dijo.

Lo único que hizo la Comisión de Salud Pública de la Asamblea Legislativa con la nueva normativa, y aprobada por el pleno, fue darle facultades al Ministerio de Salud y cambiar el nombre de la Comisión Nacional contra el Sida (Conasida) por el de Comisión Nacional Contra el VIH (Conavih).

Según él, la ley la han querido vender con un enfoque de derechos humanos, pero no lo tiene porque han dejado afuera al Ministerio de Trabajo y al de Educación, quienes son parte de los entes principales en la respuesta nacional contra el VIH.

La Comisión Nacional contra el VIH está conformada por el Ministerio de Salud, Consejo Superior de Salud Pública (CSSP), Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Procuraduría para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos (PDDH), las Asociaciones y Fundaciones cuyo objetivo sea la prevención de la enfermedad, Colegio Médico, la Secretaría de Inclusión Social y el Instituto Nacional de la Juventud.

Cuando se discutió el anteproyecto de la ley que se aprobó el miércoles, la Asociación Atlacatl propuso que en ente rector fuese una institución desligada del Ministerio de Salud porque el enfoque que buscaban era una participación multisectorial en donde estuviese la Fiscalía General de la República, Corte Suprema de Justicia, entre otros.

Con ese marco de desventaja, según Miranda, pedirán al presidente de la República, Salvador Sánchez Cerén, que vete la nueva ley porque da un mensaje negativo del país en la respuesta al VIH.

Miranda tildó la normativa como un retraso a lo que se había logrado en cuanto a la lucha y respuesta a la enfermedad. “Vamos hacer acciones hacia Casa Presidencial para que no la sancione”, aseguró. Incluso, dijo que podrían acudir a la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos para denunciar la normativa.

Canada: HIV and Human Rights Organisations welcome Canadian Minister of Justice statement recognising the unjust Criminalisation of people with HIV

HIV AND HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS WELCOME FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S INTEREST IN ENDING UNJUST HIV CRIMINALIZATION

By AIDSLAW | Published: DECEMBER 1, 2016

TORONTO, December 1, 2016 — The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and the HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario (HALCO) welcome today’s statement by Canadian Minister of Justice Jody Wilson-Raybould recognizing the ongoing problem of overly-broad, unjust criminalization of people living with HIV. Today, fittingly for World AIDS Day, the federal government has signaled its intent to address a critical issue that has long been of concern to people living with HIV and human rights advocates across Canada, and that has also attracted international criticism. Minister of Health Dr. Jane Philpott has also met with us on this very issue, and has noted that HIV criminalization in Canada is both a problem and a priority for the government to address.

Press release can be downloaded here

US: Broad coalition takes on Missouri's outdated and stigmatizing HIV criminal laws

JEFFERSON CITY — December 1st was World Aids Day and Missouri activists want legislators to change a law concerning those living with HIV.

Right now, in the state of Missouri, any person who exposes someone to HIV could go to prison. If a person contracts HIV the person who gave it to them could go to prison for life. This law has put 82 people in prison since 1997. Activists explain this law is discriminatory and based on outdated science.

Activists on November 30th launched the Missouri HIV Justice Coalition. The group plans to lobby policy makers to repeal the law.

Empower Missouri Executive Director Jeanette Mott Oxford said the laws should be based on accurate science.

She said the current law makes assumptions about HIV transmission that we now know are incorrect.

“We hope that Missouri will modernize their law making it medically accurate and taking away the stigma of people with HIV by taking the HIV specific part out of our criminal code… certainly there should be laws about doing things such as biting people, but you shouldn’t have a higher penalty for being a person with HIV.”

“About 2/3rds of the United States have “HIV-specific” statues that result in prosecutions of those living with HIV for having sexual contact without being able to prove they disclosed their HIV positive status in advance,” according to activist group The Sero Project.

Senator Rob Schaaf, R-St. Joseph, said he could see the laws changing in the future.

“The law is based upon a false premise,” Sen. Schaaf said. “I doubt that there’s a big urgency in changing it, but I think it would eventually be changed to fit our understanding of the true situation.”

Mott Oxford said the Missouri HIV Justice Coalition plans to hold upcoming events to educate more people about the current law. If you are interested in joining the group, you can contact Mott Oxford at Empower Missouri at (573)-634-2901.

Currently there is no legislation to repeal this law.

Published on KCRG TV on Dec 1, 2016

Uganda: 5 months after filing their initial petition, activists renew their call to amend HIV law

Activists renew call for HIV law amendment

By Noah Jagwe

They argue that the law contains clauses that could deter all the benefits in the fight against the scourge.

According to this group, the law instead instills fear in communities about HIV disclosure and also fuels stigmatization.

Earlier this year, some 60 civil society organizations across the country challenged the criminalization of HIVin Uganda as well as other ‘harmful’ provisions in the Act.

Dora Kichoncho Musinguzi, the executive director Uganda Network on Law and Ethics, said the salient features that are scanned out in the law which they consider discriminatory are: Clauses 21, 41 and 43 of the Act that seek to criminalize HIV, particularly intentional transmission.

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 provisions in the HIV Act, according to Kichonco, do not only stigmatize and discriminate against people living with HIV, but also deter communities from seeking HIV services such as HIV testing and subsequently HIV treatment.

“It is five months since we filed the petition. The government has not responded to our case. This is procedurally wrong and negates justice,” she said.

Kichoncho said if the law continues “as we could see”, it would heighten stigmatization of people living with HIV and that many of the targets such as 90% of people knowing their status, 90% of those who with HIV are on treatment and 90% with suppressed viral load set by the country might not be achieved.

“The law has been counterproductive to all the achievements Uganda has made.”

She said the legal environment in Uganda is not conducive and human rights have not been respected. “Laws that criminalize and stigmatize people with HIV must be repealed.”

Meanwhile, Dorothy Nassolo, communications officer of Forum of People Living with HIV/Aids Networks in Uganda said there is a crisis the country might not stand.

She said a number of patients have been hacked to death because they have been discovered by their spouses for taking ARVs covertly.

National Forum of People Living with HIV/AIDS officer Milly Katana said the most affected group by the law are women through gender-based violence at home.

Katana said it’s better for Uganda to look at other alternatives for instance biomedical tools, medical male circumcision and condoms. –

Published in New Vision on Dec 1, 2016

Canada: Ministry of Justice recognises the negative impact of the over-criminalization of HIV non-disclosure

Minister Wilson-Raybould Issues Statement on World AIDS Day

December 01, 2016 (Ottawa, ON) – Department of Justice Canada

The Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, today issued the following statement:

World AIDS Day is a time to reflect on the impact that HIV/AIDS has had on Canadians, and to give thanks to the many dedicated people who work to prevent this disease and help people get the care and support they need.

It is also a time to recognize the tremendous medical advances that have been made since the first World AIDS Day was held in 1988. HIV treatment has slowed disease progression to the point that, for many, HIV infection can now be regarded as a chronic, manageable condition.

Still, the over-criminalization of HIV non-disclosure discourages many individuals from being tested and seeking treatment, and further stigmatizes those living with HIV or AIDS. Just as treatment has progressed, the criminal justice system must adapt to better reflect the current scientific evidence on the realities of this disease.

Over the coming months, I intend to work with my provincial and territorial counterparts, affected communities and medical professionals to examine the criminal justice system’s response to non-disclosure of HIV status. This could include a review of existing charging and prosecution practices, as well as the possible development of prosecutorial guidelines. I also look forward to working with Member of Parliament Randy Boissonnault, Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on LGBTQ2 issues, in his continued efforts to engage Canadians on important issues such as this one.

On World AIDS Day, we should all share in the commitment to reduce stigma and discrimination against those living with HIV or AIDS.

Contacts

Valérie Gervais

Press Secretary

Office of the Minister of Justice

613-992-4621

Media Relations

Department of Justice Canada

613-957-4207

media@justice.gc.ca