US: Missouri proposal to add spitting whilst HIV-positive to criminal law likely defeated following strong pushback

On Tuesday, the Missouri House Committee on Civil and Criminal Proceedings held a hearing on HB 1181, a bill that would criminalize individuals knowingly infected with HIV who spit at another person. Contact with saliva has never been shown to result in HIV transmission.

HRC Senior Legislative Counsel Alison Gill testified in opposition to this harmful bill.

“According to the Presidential Commission on the HIV Epidemic, criminal sanctions for HIV transmission must be carefully drawn, directed only towards behavior which is scientifically established as a mode of transmission, and should be employed only when all other public health and civil actions fail to produce responsible behavior,” she testified. “H.B. 1181 fails to meet this standard because it criminalizes behavior with a low or negligible risk of HIV transmission, which may result in stigmatization and negative health outcomes among people with HIV and the LGBT community in Missouri.”

HRC urges the Missouri lawmakers to oppose this unnecessary and harmful bill.

Czech Republic: Health Ministry proposes law to make HIV testing mandatory for key populations

The Czech Health Ministry is pushing a proposed amendment to the law on public health which would make HIV testing compulsory for some people in high risk groups. While the ministry argues that this is to curb the spread of the disease and ensure early treatment, human rights advocates say it would mean a serious breach of human rights.

HIV testing in the Czech Republic is conducted anonymously and is free of charge. In its prevention programmes the Czech AIDS Help Society highlights the importance of getting tested in order to enable early treatment of the disease and protect others in the event of a positive outcome. Still many people who engage in what is seen as high-risk behaviour do not want to undergo testing. The Czech Health Ministry now wants to change that and force people who are considered to be at high risk to undergo testing or face a tall fine.

The proposed amendment to the law has already passed without opposition through the health committee of the Chamber of Deputies and is due to go into a third reading in the lower house. However it has stirred controversy among human rights advocates, and is strongly opposed both by the Czech AIDS Help Society and the government’s committee for the rights of sexual minorities.

Robert Hejzák, photo: Czech Television Robert Hejzák from the Czech AIDS Help Society says repression is not the way to go –even in the interest of protecting public health.

“Human rights are universal and we do not accept the argument that in the case of HIV they should be violated in the interest of public health. Moreover HIV positive people are not a direct threat to the public – this is not ebola, it is not tuberculosis or even the flu.”

The country’s chief hygiene officer Vladimír Valenta refuses to hear this argument saying that the health authorities have a duty to protect the public from an epidemic.

“We are talking about individuals who are at the centre of a high-risk environment and there is a higher probability of infection. From an epidemiological point of view HIV is no different from other diseases that put the population at risk. There is a danger off the virus spreading and this danger merits the same kind of protective measures as in other potential epidemics.”

Vladimír Valenta, photo: Filip Jandourek At present the Czech Republic (with over 10 million inhabitants) has over 2,000 people registered HIV positive, and over 200 people have died of AIDS. Each year brings on average around 230 new cases. Under the present legislation testing is only compulsory for pregnant women in order to enable heightened protection of the unborn child. If the newly-proposed amendment passes through both chambers of Parliament and is signed into law by the president pretty much anyone considered high risk could be forced to undergo a test for HIV. How this would prevent them from spreading the disease further or even encourage them to act responsibly with regard to their own health is not clear and the answer to those questions may be decisive in whether lawmakers allow this particular amendment to pass through a third and final reading in the lower house.

Sudan: Draft law providing rights and protections for people living with HIV also comes with responsibilities, including criminalising 'intentional' transmission and non-disclosue to 'prospective spouses'

April 2, 2015 (KHARTOUM) – Sudan is in the process of drafting a law to protect the rights of those living with HIV/AIDS and ensure that they receive medical and psychological care. The bill, which is being drafted by legal experts, people living with HIV/AIDS, physicians and officials, will also criminalise the intentional transmission of the disease.

Sudan’s ministry of health revealed last December that there are 79,000 cases of AIDS in the country.

The draft law would state that people living with HIV/AIDS enjoy all the rights guaranteed by the constitution and international conventions ratified by Sudan.

It prohibits any form of discrimination based on HIV status that would lead to the degradation of their dignity or erosion of their rights or exploitation.

Furthermore, the draft bill gives the patients the right to housing, access to goods and services and prohibits subjecting any citizen to HIV check as a condition for employment or dismissing employees who contract the virus unless it is proven through a medical report that they are incapable of performing their job functions.

Even then, they will have the right to request being transferred to another job.

The law granted HIV/AIDS patients the right to request open-ended sick leave with full pay in case of health-related complications and to receive social security.

For children living with the virus, they would have the right of access to health care and medical counseling and cannot be dismissed or transferred from their schools.

The law also guarantees confidentiality of their information and ensures that it cannot be published in the media without the patient’s consent.

Court trials can be held in a closed setting if one of the parties involved has HIV/AIDS, the law says. It also dictates that HIV screening would be voluntary and confidential. It would also allow infected moms to retain custody of their children.

But the law also obliges patients to take the necessary steps including seeking medical help to prevent transmission of the virus to others. Failing to do so would be punishable by law.

Should an infected individual decide to marry they should notify their prospective spouse and comply with instructions that prevent transmitting the virus.

US: Advocacy underway in Alabama to fight newly proposed bill to change 'knowingly' transmitting an STI from a misdemeanor to a felony

HIV/AIDS advocacy groups are preparing for a fight against a piece of legislation that would heighten the penalty for knowingly exposing a sexually transmitted disease to another in Alabama. Research shows stigmatizing and criminalizing HIV doesn’t reduce the transmission rate, and it actually discourages people from getting tested, Kathie Hiers, executive director of AIDS Alabama, said.

Rep. Juandalynn Givan’s bill is vague and makes is possible for spreaders of any sexually transmitted disease to be charged with a felony, she said.

“The way the bill is written if anyone puts anyone at any risk for any STDs or HIV it can be a felony,” Hiers said in an interview with AL.com. “Now, you can interpret that as any woman who has HPV could be guilty.”

She said 85 percent of women have HPV, a sexually transmitted disease, and many don’t even know it.

Givan, D-Birmingham, said she stands behind her proposed legislation.

“This piece of legislation simply imposes greater penalties for those who maliciously with the intent to recklessly by some type of malice or reckless disregard for the life and the health of another human being intentionally goes out and infects another person,” she said.

Givan said the intent of the bill isn’t to keep anyone from being tested for HIV.

She said Alabama law already defines a sexually transmitted disease, but she would be open to amendments to her bill.

The lawmaker decided to propose the legislation, heightening the penalties under current law from a Class C misdemeanor to a Class C felony, after hearing about a Montgomery pastor confessing his HIV-positive status to his congregation and admitting he engaged in sex with unknowing women.

A Class C felony carries a prison sentence of one to 10 years. A Class C misdemeanor carries a maximum prison sentence of three months.

Givan thinks current law is too lenient, and people who are intentionally infected are too embarrassed and afraid to come forward to law enforcement.

Alabama is one of only 16 states in the nation where it is a misdemeanor offense to knowingly expose another person to a sexually transmitted disease, she said.

Juan McFarland, the former pastor of Shiloh Missionary Baptist Church in Montgomery, admitted during a sermon in September 2014 to being HIV-positive since 2003 and having sex with multiple women who weren’t aware of his status.

Montgomery police haven’t charged McFarland with any crime, but McFarland lost his job.

“It is pretty severe if you have been infected with HIV for a period of time and are having sexual intercourse with multiple women,” Givan said in a previous interview with AL.com. “You can only imagine that someone may have become infected.”

The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA) released statements against the criminalization of HIV.

“We oppose legal statutes that undermine public health by criminalizing transmission of HIV, viral hepatitis, tuberculosis and other infectious diseases,” the groups stated in a press release. “Studies have documented that these laws discourage individuals from being screened and treated for conditions when early diagnosis and treatment of infected individuals is one of the most effective methods to control the disease.”

Resources should be put behind evidence-based prevention methods not towards the criminalization, the groups said.

Hiers said everyone should take personal responsibility for protecting themselves against STDS, and criminalizing diseases doesn’t help.

“I think it lulls people into a false sense of security because if you make it all the responsibility of the HIV-positive person or the person who has the sexually transmitted infection then people may not practice universal precautions,” she said.

In this day and age, Hiers said everyone having sex needs to assume the other person has a sexually transmitted disease until they reach the point they are in a monogamous relationship and have been tested.

The Sero Project, a group working to end the criminalization of HIV, is expected to get involved and lead a grassroots effort against Givan’s bill if the lawmaker doesn’t table it herself.

Since research has proven that criminalizing HIV doesn’t reduce transmission, Sean Strub, the executive director of the group, said several states are considering decriminalizing it. Iowa became the first state to do so last year.

“So it is truly ironic that while much of the rest of the country is looking at changing these statutes, to slow the epidemic, a legislator in Alabama wants to make the statute more punitive, which will most likely make the epidemic in Alabama worse,” he said. “I’m sure that’s the opposite of what the legislator intends, but it is the likely outcome, which is tragic. Stopping this bill is, from Sero’s perspective, the single most compelling HIV prevention priority in Alabama right now.”

Center for Reproductive Rights welcomes Kenya High Court ruling that quashes vague and unconstitutional HIV-specific criminal statute

03.30.15 – (PRESS RELEASE) Key provisions of a law criminalizing the transmission of HIV in an effort to curb spread of the disease in Kenya are unconstitutional and violate fundamental human rights, according to a recent landmark ruling from the High Court of Kenya. The Center for Reproductive Rights filed an amicus brief in support of the case brought by AIDS Law Project in 2010.

While the “HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, No.14 of 2006” (“HIV/AIDS Act”) codifies measures for treatment, counseling, care and support of people living with HIV—it contains troubling provisions that criminalize the transmission of HIV in certain instances and permit partner disclosure of HIV/AIDS status by health care workers. The law also discriminates against women, who are often subject to coercive practices and violations of informed consent and confidentiality when testing for HIV, particularly during pregnancy.

In its decision issued on March 18, the three-judge panel ruled Section 24 of the HIV/AIDS Act which criminalized transmission of HIV was unconstitutional under the Kenyan Constitution, as the provisions are too vague and that disclosing patients’ HIV status violates their rights to privacy and confidentiality. The judges also advised the State Law Office to review the HIV/AIDS Act to “avoid further litigation” surrounding the law.

Said Evelyne Opondo, regional director for Africa at the Center for Reproductive Rights:

“All people are entitled to quality health services—regardless of their HIV status or other health needs.

“This law has inflicted fear, shame, and punishment on countless Kenyans, especially pregnant women who desperately need and deserve quality maternal health care.

“We commend the High Court for finding the criminalization of HIV transmission as unconstitutional and a violation of Kenyans’ fundamental human rights. Now is the time for the Kenya government to immediately amend this legislation and ensure people living with HIV can get the care they need without fear of discrimination or criminalization.”

“We must ensure people living with HIV receive the proper medical care and support that they need,” said Jacinta Nyachae, Executive Director of the AIDS Law Project. “If we want to reduce the spread HIV and AIDS and put an end to the stigma, violence and discrimination surrounding the disease, our public policies must be based on medical evidence and grounded in human rights.”

In 2011, the Center for Reproductive Rights submitted an amicus brief in the AIDS Law Project v. Attorney General & Director of Public Prosecutions (Petition No. 97, 2010), challenging the constitutionality of the law. The Center claimed that the HIV law could be interpreted to criminalize women living with HIV who expose or transmit the virus to a child during pregnancy, delivery, or breastfeeding. The Center argued that criminalizing HIV exposure and transmission does not protect women from transmission, but instead exacerbates existing stigma and discrimination against women, exposing them to risk of prosecution. The Center’s brief also recommended the law’s provisions permitting partner disclosure of HIV status be quashed.

Brazil: HIV-specific criminal law introduced amid media frenzy and moral panic over ‘barebacking’ gay subculture

On April 2nd 2015, a simply worded amendment to Article 1 of Law No. 8072 of July 25, 1990 – covering ‘heinous crimes’ – will be presented to the Brazilian Parliament by the populist Congressman, Pompeo de Mattos.

The amendement, draft Bill No. 198, 2015, would add to the list of heinous crimes – which currently includes murder, extortion, rape, child exploitation and spreading an epidemic that results in death – individuals who “transmit and infect consciously and deliberately others with the AIDS virus. (sic)”.

The bill has considerable support thanks to an outbreak of moral panic that began with an article in the daily newspaper, O Estado de S. Paulo, published on February 22nd, that uncovered the gay ‘barebacking’ subculture and further suggested that some men were deliberately passing on HIV to unsuspecting partners.

Two days later, it was reported in a blog of the weekly magazine, Veja, that police were now looking into the allegations.

According to [Secretary of Justice and Defence and Citizenship, Aloysius Toledo Caesar], [Secretary of Public Security, Alexandre de Moraes] has guided teams of the Department of Civil Police Intelligence (Dipol) to act covertly to identify the groups. Chat rooms will be analyzed, websites, blogs and even clubs and sex saunas. “We agreed to encourage all actions that may prevent persons continue to criminally transmit the virus,” said Toledo. “When the transmission is done intentionally, our understanding of the law is that the legal concept is configured to be like an assassination attempt, a more serious penalty,” he added. Under Article 130 of the Penal Code, the penalty for transmitting the virus without the partner’s consent is up to 4 years in prison.

On February 27th, the Brazilian country office of UNAIDS issued a press release expressing concern about the “impact [of these media reports] on increasing stigma and prejudice related to HIV and people living with the virus.” It went to explain that condoms, treatment, PEP and PrEP are all effective HIV prevention tools, and concluded:

UNAIDS also highlights that there is no evidence that the use of criminal laws for HIV is an effective tool to prevent and response to the epidemic. On the other hand, there are strong indications that the fear of being arrested or imprisoned may discourage people to test for HIV or to stay on therapy.

The moral panic became a full blown media frenzy on March 15 (and again on March 22) when the top-rated Sunday news TV programme, Fantástico, on TV Globo, aired a sensationalised two-part investigation into the ‘barebacking’ phenomeon, repeating the same allegations. The reports (in Portuguese) can be viewed here and here.

In reaction to this, the Department of STDs, AIDS and Viral Hepatitis of the Ministry of Health issued a strong statement of its own on March 21, and three Brazilian civil society organizations – ABIA (Brazilian Interdisciplinary AIDS Association), RNP+ (National Network of People Living with HIV) and GIV (Group to Encourage Life) – also issued press releases or statements noting that these reports stigmatise gay men living with HIV; that the idea of deliberately infecting someone is primarily a fantasy; and that in the extremely rare case of malcious, intentional transmisison the current general law is sufficient.

This isn’t the first time that there has been a media frenzy and moral panic around criminal HIV transmission. Two high profile cases in 2009 led to a strong statement from the Ministry of Health against the use of the criminal law unless transmisison was intentional.

According to the Global Criminalisation Scan, a number of laws can be used to prosecute alleged HIV non-disclosure, exposure or transmission, and there have been at least five prosecutions since the first recorded criminal case in 1995.

Follow the progress of bill PL 198/2015 here.

Update: On May 19th, former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who chaired the Global Commission on HIV and the Law, published a clear statement against the law on his Facebook page.

Screenshot 2015-06-01 12.15.07

Kenya: High Court declares Section 24 of HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act (2006) unconstitutional, removes overly broad and vague HIV-specific criminal statute

By Kamau Muthoni Kenya: The High Court has declared unconstitutional a section of the HIV and Aids Prevention and Control Act that sought to criminalise reckless spreading of the disease. A three-judge bench comprising justices Mumbi Ngugi, Isaac Lenaola and George Odunga ruled Section 24, introduced by the State and criminalising the reckless spreading of HIV, was unclear and had no limits on which group of people was targeted.

“We so hold that Section 24 of the HIV and Aids Prevention and Control Act No. 14 of 2006 does not meet the principle of legality which is a component of the rule of law. The said section is vague and over-broad, and lacks certainty, especially with respect to the term ‘sexual contact’,” read part of the judgment.

As drafted, the section provided that a person who is aware of being infected with HIV or who is carrying and is aware of carrying HIV shall not, knowingly and recklessly, place another person at risk of becoming infected with HIV unless that other person knows that fact and voluntarily accepts the risk of being infected. Further, the section read that the person shall take all reasonable measures and precautions to prevent the transmission of HIV to others; and inform, in advance, any sexual contact or person with whom needles are shared of that fact, failure to which one would be jailed, if convicted by a court, for a term not exceeding seven years or a fine not exceeding Sh500,000, or both.

Justice Lenaola ruled that the section of law failed to meet the legal requirement that an offence must be clearly defined in law. “To retain that provision in the statute books would lead to an undesirable situation of the retention of legislation that provides for vague criminal offences which leave it to the court’s subjective assessment whether a defendant is to be convicted or acquitted,” said the judge.

In the case, filed by a lobby group called Aids Law Project, the court heard that the same section had warranted other people surrounding an infected person to seek his or her status from a medical practitioner without their discretion or involvement. The lobby group argued that such risk of unwarranted disclosure of confidential information was against the affected person’s privacy. Aids Law Project adopted the view that Section 24 of the Act was likely to promote fear and stigma as it imposed a stereotype that people living with HIV were immoral and dangerous criminals, and this would negate the efforts being made to encourage people to live openly about their HIV status.

US: Texas Senator Joan Huffman introduces four new HIV-related laws, including vague and overly broad HIV-specific criminal statute, SB 779

Three bills in the Texas statehouse would use HIV status as a weapon, one would lessen stigma.

Januari Leo, who works with Legacy Community Health Service, is the state’s go-to girl when it comes to following bills in the Texas Legislature related to HIV/AIDS. So when she calls a bill harmful, she’s likely not exaggerating.

Leo this week identified four bills introduced during this legislative session that would directly impact those living with HIV. Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, filed SB 779, which would use a crime suspect’s HIV status against them if they knowingly infected the victim with HIV.

SB 1705, also filed by Huffman and its companion HB 2395 by Rep. Rick Miller, R-Sugar Land, would allow a court to test a juvenile for HIV following a crime.

Leo, a longtime social worker who has worked with clients living with HIV, is blunt about the three bills: “They would criminalize HIV. HIV isn’t a crime. It’s a public health problem.”

Texas is among five states that have no law criminalizing HIV, but there have been cases prosecuted in Texas based on exposure or transmission.

Currently 37 states have some form of criminal law related to exposure and/or transmission of HIV on the books, according to the LGBT Movement Advancement Project.

According to the Center for HIV Law and Policy, both the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS and the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division have recommended the repeal of state HIV criminalization laws. They are joined by numerous medical organizations.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, states enacted HIV-specific criminal exposure laws during the early uncertain days of the AIDS crisis.

That legislation criminalized HIV-positive people who know their status and intentionally expose it to others.

In order to qualify for funding under the passage of the Ryan White Comprehensive Act in 1990, states were required verify that their HIV criminalization laws were sufficient enough to prosecute criminals.

Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, has introduced legislation making HIV tests a routine part of medical testing, but giving individuals the

choice to opt out.

“There’s already legislation making it a crime to intentionally spread HIV,” Leo said of the Ryan White Act requirements. “But these aren’t those bills. These new bills use HIV status as a crime, against people who are suspects in a crime but have yet to be proven guilty. They’re allowing prosecutors to use private medical records, as mandated under HIPPA, as a weapon.”

Though the bills’ language narrowly identifies cases when the law could be applied, you can’t forget the bigger picture.

“We’re trying to get to zero cases of HIV through so many resources, including PReP, preventive testing and education,” Leo said. But the bills’ authors may not realize there is also an unintentional outcome: stigmatization, which could cause less testing and awareness of one’s HIV status.

Enter SB 194 by Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, which makes HIV testing a routine part of medical tests while letting the patient opt out.

“It creates a standard. Currently you have to ask for a test. Making people aware and voluntary eliminates stigma,” Leo said of Ellis’ bill. It has now been introduced for a fourth time.

Another bill that’s seen its fair share of legislative sessions is HB 65 by Rep. Ruth Jones McClendon, D-San Antonio. The bill would create a pilot needle-exchange program in a handful of Texas counties, including Dallas, to help prevent the spread of HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and other infectious and communicable diseases.

The bill, unfortunately, was used as ammunition against its Republican sponsors, including former Sen. Bob Deuell, who was ousted by candidates backed by far right groups like Texas Right to Life and Empower Texans.

Like many advocates, Leo said she is playing defense during the 84th legislative session, where killing a bad bill is better than passing any good bills at all.

……………

HIV Legislation

• SB 1705 by Sen. Joan Huffman and HB 2395 by Rep. Rick Miller would allow a court to test a juvenile for HIV following a crime if the criminal suspect is suspected to have HIV.

• SB 779 by Sen. Huffman would allow a court to use a crime suspect’s HIV status against them if they knowingly infected the victim with HIV.

• SB 194 by Sen. Rodney Ellis makes HIV testing a routine part of medical tests while letting the patient opt out.

• HB 65 by Rep. Ruth McClendon would create a pilot needle exchange program in certain Texas counties.

Honduras reforms 20 year-old omnibus HIV law eliminating mandatory testing and providing free healthcare

Finally, after months of hard work and activism, Honduras managed to approve the reform of 47 articles of the HIV Law, which helps people with HIV in the country. This reform seeks to guarantee the rights of people with HIV and/or AIDS and, thus, ensure a comprehensive response to the epidemic.

One of the most significant achievements of this reform is the 47^th article, which establishes that “all people with HIV are exempted from payment of the recovery fee or any other fee for the provision of services”; an amount charged in different health centers to patients with HIV, which was causing people to abandon their treatment.

One of the most significant achievements was the modification of the article which established that people with HIV were not allowed to adopt any children or even worst were not allowed to get married. Massive HIV testing in detention centers and mandatory HIV testing for vulnerable groups were also eliminated.

This achievement marks a milestone in the respect for the rights of people with HIV, since it is the first time to reform this law, after 20 years of having been created. “It has been a struggle for many years to get the process started, and now it was approved in a short period of time, which is a great achievement. The project was introduced in May, 2014”, explained Sandra Zambrano, Executive Director of Asociación para una vida mejor para personas con y afectadas por el vih (APUVIMEH).

“The excitement is great, I’m really happy, we have won and it seems incredible that it has happened (…) This is only the beginning of many changes, and it motivates me to keep fighting. It has been difficult, we are a minority, but together we have succeeded and that means a lot”, said Luis Javier Tejada.

The reform will take effect once it is published in the official newspaper of Honduras named “Gazette”.

Undoubtedly, this success is the product of arduous teamwork that has been carried out thanks to organizations such as UNAIDS and the Pan American Health Organization, in conjunction with the Honduran civil society and other international organizations.

Gambia's National Assembly passes new HIV omnibus law that appears to be protective and supportive, but anti-gay law with life sentence for 'aggravated homosexuality' if living with HIV remains on the books

The Minister for Health and Social Welfare, Omar Sey, on Wednesday, 19th March, presented a bill entitled HIV AND AIDS PREVENTION AND CONTROL BILL, 2015 to the National Assembly during a session held in Banjul.In reading it for the second and third times, the health minister said the new Bill states that the ministers responsible for basic and secondary education, higher education and health shall ensure that students are educated on HIV and AIDS in public and private schools at basic, secondary and higher levels, including formal, non-formal and indigenous learning systems.

Mr. Sey said it shall be ensured that education and training courses cover mode of transmission, prevention and other sexually transmitted infections as well as human rights of the people living with HIV and vulnerable groups.

Further dwelling on the Bill, he said health care personnel shall ensure that education and information on HIV and AIDS form part of the health services that they render to their patients and that the ministry of health shall ensure that health care personnel are appropriately trained on information and education on HIV and AIDS.

On sensitization of HIV and AIDS in the work place, he said all employees and members of the armed forces and security services shall receive standard HIV and AIDS education which shall include themes on the causes, modes of transmission and prevention of HIV and on confidentiality at the work place and the acceptance of workers living with HIV and AIDS.

The health minister said community education on HIV and AIDS shall be launched, including the education of nationals abroad.

He said part of the Bill also requires the provision of information for tourists and passengers on transit.

In his intervention, Hon. Ousman Bah of Sabach Sanjal, who seconded the motion, commended the health ministry and said the bill is timely and relevant in the fight against HIV and AIDS. He urged his colleagues to pass the bill without hesitation.

Following some amendments, the Bill was eventually passed by the whole committee of the house.

But: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/gambian-leader-approves-anti-gay-law