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 IT IS BASED ON FEAR AND OUTDATED UNDERSTANDING OF HIV RISK AND HARM.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

Jamaica: Growing calls to make HIV transmission a criminal offense

Legal Loophole – Jamaica Has No Law To Charge Persons Who Wilfully Attempt To Spread HIV

There are growing calls in local legal circles to implement laws to make it a criminal offence for persons to wilfully and knowingly spread the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Although it is reported that Jamaica has an estimated 32,000 persons living with HIV, so far, no person has been charged and convicted of exposing another person to infection by engaging in unsafe sexual conduct.

“There is no clear law which makes it an offence,” said attorney-at-law Chukwuemeka Cameron, as he argued that someone should take a case to court to test the law.

According to Cameron, if someone should be brave enough to take such a case to the courts it may open a floodgate.

“It is a new disease which came about after the enactment of the Offences Against the Person Act, and so this is a perfect example of the need for the law to change with new circumstances,” agreed attorney-at-law Bert Samuels.

“We have kept abreast of the changes of computer technology to enhance commerce but we have failed to look at a problem that touches and concerns our health. Our Parliament is entrusted to pass laws for peace, order and good governance of the country, and must, as a matter of urgency, pass laws to punish those who knowingly pass a deadly disease,” added Samuels.

The debate on the wilful and knowing spread of HIV was sparked recently as the Supreme Court had to decide, in an extradition case, whether the transmission of HIV by sexual relations is an offence in Jamaica.

The court ruled that charges could only be brought in cases where the victim was infected with the virus. But attorney-at-law Peter Champagnie has a different view.

Champagnie argues that there should be specific legislation to deal with offences committed knowingly by HIV-infected persons, as he disagreed with the court’s ruling.

CULPABILITY

“Although a victim may not be infected by HIV from unprotected sex, I cannot understand why it could not be categorised as an attempt,” said Champagnie.

According to Champagnie, the fact that a victim is not infected does not absolve the infected person of culpability.

“To my mind, he would have known of his status and was reckless as to whether or not the persons contracted the disease,” said Champagnie.

Attorney-at-law Don Foote, who represented 47-year-old Jamaican, Alfred Flowers, had argued that he should not be extradited to Canada to face charges of aggravated sexual assault because there was no corresponding offence in Jamaica.

Flowers knew, since June 1996, that he was HIV-positive but he had unprotected sex with four women, including his wife who he married in 2002 without informing them of his status.

The women said if they knew he was HIV-positive, they would not have been intimate with him. Three of the women are now HIV-positive while the fourth is currently HIV-negative.

Director of state proceedings Althea Jarrett and senior deputy director of public prosecutions Jeremy Taylor could find no local case to use as a precedent, and had to rely on authorities from other jurisdictions to support their interpretation of the Offences Against the Person Act.

They relied on Section 22 of the act to oppose Flowers’ contention that there was no corresponding offence in Jamaica.

“Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously wound or inflict grievous bodily harm upon any other person with or without any weapon or instrument, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof, shall be liable to be imprisoned for a term not exceeding three years,” the section reads.

EXTRADITION TO CANADA

The court comprising Justice Christine McDonald, Justice Sarah Thompson James, and Justice Kissock Laing, in agreeing that Flowers should be extradited to stand trial in respect of the three women who are now HIV-positive, said it was open for the court to find that a person who knows that he is infected with HIV and recklessly infects another may be guilty of inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to Section 22 of the Offences Against the Person Act.

But the court made it clear that if the victim of unprotected sex with an HIV-positive person is not infected, then that person cannot bring any criminal charges.

The court found that there was a grave lacuna in the Jamaican law, and said further that it was unfair that Flowers would only have to answer to charges in respect of three of the four complainants.

In explaining why Flowers cannot be tried in relation to the complainant who is not infected, the court said, “The infection would be a necessary ingredient were the accused to be charged in Jamaica for the offence under Section 22 of the Offences Against the Person Act.”

Canadian Groups Say No To HIV Criminalisation

The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network that has been opposing HIV criminalisation for some time. It argues that:

– Canada is no model when it comes to HIV criminalisation where it has become out of control. With more than 180 people charged to date, Canada has become one of the world leaders in criminalising people living with HIV, with serious implications for human rights and public health.

– UNAIDS, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law, and the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to health have all urged to limit HIV criminalisation to intentional transmission – which is far from being the case in Canada, where people can be convicted of extremely serious offence even if they had no intent to harm their partner, took precautions (used a condom or were on effective treatment) and did not transmit HIV.

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

Uganda: Civil society coalition file a constitutional petition against controversial HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, 2015

KAMPALA – A network of civil society organisations has dragged the Attorney General to the Constitutional Court, querying the packaging of the HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, 2015.

Representatives of the CSOs filed a constitutional petition on Thursday, lamenting that the law is undermining efforts to fight the scourge.

“I believe the law will have the overall effect of undermining public health objectives of HIV prevention and control,” the petition reads in part. –

The petitioners are Uganda Network on Law, Ethics and HIV/AIDS (UGANET), Makerere law don Prof Ben Twinomugisha, and the International Community of Women Living with HIV in Eastern Africa (ICWEA).

Government’s chief legal representative and advisor the Attorney General is listed as the respondent.

Parliament passed the bill on May 13, 2014. President Yoweri Museveni assented to the bill in August of the same year. –

Russia: Gay propaganda law especially impacting men with HIV who are being blackmailed for not disclosing their HIV status by anti-gay gangs

Russian crime gangs find gays easy targets for blackmail

By VERONIKA SILCHENKO and IRINA TITOVA

Originally published by the Associated Press on Jun. 5 2016

460x

In this Wednesday, May 25, 2016 photo, Alexander Loza, a legal adviser at Positive Dialogue, an organization that provides consulting services for gays, speaks to the Associated Press in St. Petersburg, Russia. Russian crime gangs find gays easy targets for blackmail. In the past two years, an increasing number of gays has fallen victim to criminal gangs operating through gay dating sites, rights groups say. (AP Photo/Dmitri Lovetsky)

“Many gay people in Russia lead a double life, unwilling to disclose their sexual orientation to their family or at work,” Loza said. “In the case of such setup dates, they are afraid to disclose their [HIV] status, to be accused of pedophilia, and therefore they are afraid to appeal to the police.”

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia (AP) — Criminal gangs in Russia, operating through gay dating sites, have found a lucrative new blackmail target: homosexual men.

A St. Petersburg economist, one of their latest victims, said several men burst into the apartment where he was meeting his date. Claiming that his date was under age, they threatened to call the police and to release a video they had secretly filmed unless he paid up.

The gay rights group Vykhod, or Coming Out, said they registered 12 such attacks in St. Petersburg in 2015 and at least six more gay men have come to them so far this year. LGBT activists believe the real number is far higher and say the attacks have increased in the past two years.

Since homosexuality finds little acceptance in Russian society, many gays keep their sexual orientation hidden from their families, friends and co-workers. This makes them easy extortion targets for criminals.

Vykhod spokeswoman Nika Yuryeva said most of the recent attacks have followed the same pattern as the one seen by the St. Petersburg economist.

Alexander Loza, a legal adviser at Positive Dialogue, an organization that provides consulting services for gays, particularly those living with the HIV virus, has heard similar stories.

“Many gay people in Russia lead a double life, unwilling to disclose their sexual orientation to their family or at work,” Loza said. “In the case of such setup dates, they are afraid to disclose their status, to be accused of pedophilia, and therefore they are afraid to appeal to the police.”

The activists said Russian criminals have been emboldened by a 2013 law that made it a crime to expose children to gay “propaganda,” part of a Kremlin-backed effort to defend traditional family values and counter the influence of what it considers a decadent West.

Alexander Zhelezkin, who manages outreach programs at Positive Dialogue, said the law was what made him decide to become a gay activist.

“Now, my coming out is my defense,” he said.

For prominent television journalist Anton Krasovsky, however, that move ended his career in Russia. He was fired after he came out on the air in 2013 and hasn’t been able to find a job in television since.

Krasovsky said it will be a long time before gays in Russia feel protected enough to speak publicly about their sexual orientation.

“To stop being afraid, they need to begin to trust the state where they live, but they don’t trust the state where they live now,” he said.

The St. Petersburg economist, however, did go to the police. He spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity out of fear that his attackers, who know where he lives, would seek retribution if they learned that he had reported them.

The economist, who gave his age as “about 30,” said he thought they were lying about his date being a minor. But he said the attackers beat and threatened him — and suggested they had friends in the police force who they said would lock him up on fabricated charges.

He said they demanded more than 100,000 rubles ($1,500). One of them took his bank card and cleaned out his account, and they released him only after he agreed to transfer the balance the next day, he said.

The crime gangs who carry out such attacks are not necessarily anti-gay, but have identified a profitable niche where they feel they can operate with impunity, Loza and Yuryeva said.

The economist agreed.

“They commit these crimes not because they are homophobes — they are simply taking advantage of the situation,” knowing that few people would go to the police after such an experience, he said. “I think they are just common criminals who chose this kind of method.”

St. Petersburg police spokesman Vyacheslav Stepchenko said he had not heard about these blackmail cases and said he wasn’t aware of any anti-gay attacks being registered in the city in recent years.

He offered to check with the specific police station that the economist reported the crime to, but the economist didn’t want to draw public attention to his case by disclosing which station it was.

Timur Bulatov, an anti-gay activist who claims to have helped get a number of teachers fired after outing them as homosexuals, said he sees no need to resort to the blackmail used by criminal gangs.

“Why attack a sick person? Such a person needs treatment,” he said. “I have a bunch of legal methods to use to influence such a person, to put pressure on him.”

Bulatov, who wears camouflage outfits and carries a handgun in a hip holster, said gays are the “enemies” of Russian society and its children, but should be opposed only through legal means.

He said the law banning gay propaganda among minors was intentionally made vague so it can be applied in a wide range of circumstances. The law, for instance, has made it easy to target gay and lesbian teachers in Russia because they work directly with children.

The federal law was modeled on a 2012 St. Petersburg law authored by Vitaly Milonov, a city lawmaker and outspoken opponent of LGBT rights.

“This law is a preventive measure. It was introduced not to punish anyone, but to prevent such public actions as gay parades, because parents in Russia don’t want their children to see these things,” Milonov told the AP.

Milonov, who has a large portrait of the Russian Orthodox Church patriarch on his office wall, said his mission was to promote “normal” families with many children.

“There is no oppression of homosexual people in Russia,” he said. “When gay organizations complain of such harassment, they do it in order to get more money from soft-hearted Europeans.”

HIV JUSTICE WORLDWIDE partners, SERO Project and PWN-USA, bring together advocates from U.S. & 4 countries to 2nd National HIV Is Not a Crime Training Academy at University of Alabama-Huntsville

Advocates from 34 states & 4 other countries convene at University of Alabama-Huntsville to strategize Addressing Discriminatory HIV Laws at 2nd National HIV Is Not a Crime Training Academy.

Even as a bill repealing Colorado’s HIV criminalization laws awaits the governor’s pen, much work remains to be done to bring laws up to date with current science in at least 33 states.

Eleven states have laws on the books that can send people living with HIV to prison for behaviors (such as biting and spitting) that carry virtually no risk of transmitting HIV. Forty-four states have prosecuted people living with HIV for perceived exposure or transmission; most states permit prosecution even when no transmission has occurred, and actual risk is negligible.

In Texas, a man living with HIV is currently serving a 35-year sentence for spitting. In Idaho, Kerry Thomas is serving 30 years for allegedly not disclosing his HIV status to a partner – despite the fact that he took measures to prevent transmission, including using a condom and taking medications to maintain an undetectable viral load. Kerry Thomas’ accuser never acquired HIV. Yet his appeal was recently denied, demonstrating that current science continues not to matter to the courts.

“These laws make disclosure harder. Because we so fear the punishment, we just keep things bottled up inside,” says Monique Howell-Moree, who was prosecuted under a US military non-disclosure law and would have faced 8-12 years if convicted. “I didn’t know the best way to disclose … Had I had the support and knowledge that I have now back then, I would most definitely have done things differently.”

In her HIV/AIDS platform and in a recent meeting with activists, U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton called for “reform[ing] outdated and stigmatizing HIV criminalization laws.” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign has said the candidate is also “absolutely opposed” to these laws, according to the Washington Blade. The confluence of outdated laws, unjust prosecutions and profound disparities is bringing advocates and activists from 34 states and 4 countries together for the second national convening dedicated exclusively to strategizing to fight back in the name of human rights and public health.

WHAT: HIV Is Not a Crime II National Training Academy

WHERE: University of Alabama, Huntsville

WHEN: May 17-20, 2016

The Training Academy is co-organized by SERO Project and Positive Women’s Network-USA, two national networks of people living with HIV. It comes on the heels of a major victory in Colorado, where through the dedicated efforts of a group known as the “CO Mod Squad” (“mod” refers to “modernization” of the law), led by Positive Women’s Network-USA (PWN-USA) Colorado, a bill was passed last week that updates laws to take account of current science and eliminates HIV criminalization language.

“With people living with HIV leading the way and our allies supporting us, we were able to do something many thought we couldn’t,” said Barb Cardell, co-chair of PWN-USA Colorado and one of the leaders of the successful efforts. “The law now focuses on proven methods of protecting public health — like education and counseling — while discarding the language of criminalization, which actually discourages testing, treatment and disclosure.”

“This law represents real progress for Coloradans, regardless of their HIV status,” she added. At the Training Academy this week, Cardell will share some highlights and lessons learned from the CO Mod Squad’s experience.

Keynote speakers at the Training Academy include Mary Fisher, who stunned the audience at the 1992 Republican National Convention with a speech about her experience as a woman living with HIV; Joel Goldman, longtime advocate and managing director of the Elizabeth Taylor AIDS Foundation; and Colorado state senator Pat Steadman, the senate sponsor of the bill just passed repealing HIV criminalization in his state. Session topics will explore best practices for changing policy, and will consider the intersections of HIV criminalization with issues ranging from institutional racism to transphobia, criminalization of sex work, mental illness and substance use, and overpolicing of marginalized communities.

“The goals of the Training Academy go beyond giving advocates the tools and know-how they need to change policy, to deepening our collective understanding of the impact of these laws and why they are enforced the way they are,” said Naina Khanna, executive director of PWN-USA. “We hope participants will leave better prepared to effect change by thinking differently, forging new partnerships and ensuring communities most heavily impacted by criminalization are in leadership in this movement.”

At SADC-PF parliamentarians meeting in South Africa, Patrick Eba of UNAIDS says HIV criminalization is a setback to regional AIDS efforts

The criminalisation of HIV simply undermines the remarkable global scientific advances and proven public health strategies that could open the path to vanquishing AIDS by 2030, Patrick Eba from the human rights and law division of UNAIDS told SADC-PF parliamentarians meeting in South Africa.

Restating a remark made by Justice Edwin Cameron of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, Eba said: “HIV criminalisation makes it more difficult for those at risk of HIV to access testing and prevention. There is simply no evidence that it works. It undermines the remarkable scientific advances and proven public health strategies that open the path to vanquishing AIDS by 2030.”

SADC-PF has undertaken, as part of its commitment to advocacy for sexual reproductive health rights, an ambitious 90-90-90 initiative in east and southern Africa, with the help of the media, to ensure that all people living with HIV should know their status by 2020; that by 2020 90 percent of all people diagonised with HIV will receive sustained antiretroviral therapy; and that by 2020 90 percent of all people living with HIV and receiving antiretroviral therapy will have viral suppression.

He implored parliamentarians from SADC-PF member states to advocate for laws that would decriminalise HIV after he noted several African countries had HIV-specific criminal laws that resulted in arrests and prosecutions of those convicted of spreading HIV intentionally.

Eba said calls for the criminalisation of intentional or wilful spreading of HIV stem from the fact there are high rates of rape and sexual violence, and most notably in post-conflict countries such as the DRC there exist promises of retribution, incapacitation, deterrence and rehabilitation.

He gave an example of one case of miscarriage of justice involving a woman in Gabon who was wrongfully arrested after a man accused her of having infected him with HIV, but after spending several months in detention she was actually found to be HIV-negative after she went for testing.

Eba appealed to SADC-PF parliamentarians to consider decriminalisation of HIV on the basis that antiretroviral treatment (ART) has a 96 percent rate in reducing the risk of HIV transmission.

“End criminalisation to end AIDS,” he implored SADC-PF parliamentarians who included Agnes Limbo of the RDP, Ida Hoffmann of Swapo and Ignatius Shixwameni of APP, all delegated by Namibia to the conference.

Eba also referred to the motion unanimously adopted in November 2015 that was moved by Duma Boko of Botswana and that was seconded by Ahmed Shaik Imam of South Africa who reaffirmed SADC member states’ obligation to respect, fulfil and promote human rights in all endevours undertaken for the prevention and treatment of HIV.

That motion had also called on SADC member states to consider rescinding and reviewing punitive laws specific to the prosecution of HIV transmission, exposure and non-disclosure. It also reiterated the role by parliamentarians to enact laws that support evidence-based HIV prevention and treatment interventions that conform with regional and international human rights frameworks.

Eba said since HIV infection is now a chronic treatable health condition, no charges of “murder” or “manslaughter” should arise and that HIV non-disclosure and exposure should not be criminalised in the absence of transmission, and that significant risk of transmission should be based on best available scientific and medical evidence.

On the other hand, he said, there is no significant risk in cases of consistent condom use practice or other forms of safer sex and effective HIV treatment.

The SADC-PF joint sessions also addressed the issues of criminalisation of termination of pregnancy. The joint sessions ended on Thursday with a raft of recommendations for the ministerial meetings.

Originally published in New Era.

Bangladesh: Communicable Disease Prevention, Control and Elimination Act, 2016 which includes jail time and a fine for not being screened and/or treated for many communicable diseases, including HIV, is approved by cabinet

The cabinet yesterday approved a proposed law aiming at preventing and controlling communicable diseases in the country.

The proposed law titled Communicable Disease Prevention, Control and Elimination Act, 2016 has a provision of jail term and fine for a person who is affected with such a disease but does not undergo medical tests for detection.

Briefing reporters after a cabinet meeting at the Secretariat, Cabinet Secretary M Shafiul Alam said the affected persons concerned would also have to be examined in related and specified institutes to detect the types of their diseases.

If a patient avoids medical tests to detect presence of diseases considered as transmittable, they would face one-year imprisonment or Tk 2 lakh fine, he added.

Alam said one of the goals of the draft law is to protect people from communicable diseases as well as taking proper measures to create mass awareness about germs related diseases like Kala-Azar, HIV, Influenza, Nipah, Ebola and Typhoid.

Under the proposed law, a patient or the affected persons would have to be screened and isolated to protect common people from being affected, he observed.

Experts have termed the proposed law a “landmark and a milestone.”

“It’s a landmark decision of the government. With enactment of the law, Bangladesh’s health sector will move one step forward,” said Prof Dr AKM Shamsuzzaman, director of Communicable Disease Control of the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS).

He told The Daily Star that communicable diseases would be eliminated more quickly with the implementation of the law.

Communicable diseases like malaria, dengue, Filariasis, Kala-azar, all types of influenza, Nipah, HIV, viral hepatitis, among others, would be brought under the legal framework of the law, he added.

Prof Shamsuzzaman further said, “We used to face difficulties in dealing with diseases which appear suddenly on any part of the country. With the enactment of the law, the health department will be able to involve other government bodies concerned including the law-enforcement agencies for controlling such outbreaks.”

Emerging threats of diseases like Zika and communicable diseases which transmit frequently on bordering areas would be dealt under legal framework, he said, thanking the government for approving the proposed law.

The health ministry moved to enact the law in 2014 but couldn’t do so due to various bureaucratic tangles, according to insiders.

The draft law was prepared in line with and replacing the Bangladesh Malaria Eradication (Repeal) Ordinance, 1977 and the Prevention of Malaria (Special Provisions) Ordinance, they said.

As per the proposed law, the authorities concerned will create quarantine facilities for affected persons. The law also creates a scope for the government to take all kinds of assistance from other countries to prevent communicable diseases.

New report shows HIV criminalisation is a growing, global concern but advocates are fighting back

A new report released today shows that HIV criminalisation is a growing, global phenomenon. However, advocates around the world are working hard to ensure that the criminal law’s approach to people living with HIV fits with up-to-date science, as well as key legal and human rights principles.

Click on this link to read or download Advancing HIV Justice 2: Building momentum in global advocacy against HIV criminalisation.

What do we mean by ‘HIV criminalisation’?

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

Such unjust application of the criminal law in relation to HIV is (i) not guided by the best available scientific and medical evidence relating to HIV, (ii) fails to uphold the principles of legal and judicial fairness (including key criminal law principles of legality, foreseeability, intent, causality, proportionality and proof), and (iii) infringes upon the human rights of those involved in criminal law cases.

What is the impact of HIV criminalisation?

Understanding the potential negative impact of HIV criminalisation on public health is critical to making informed policy decisions.

The last few years have seen increasing interest among researchers in the area of HIV criminalisation and a push into new areas of enquiry to examine the impacts of the unjust application of criminal law.

The report summarises a body of research which shows that instead of delivering a public health benefit, HIV criminalisation is a poor public health strategy, exacerbating racial and gender inequalities and negatively impacting a number of key areas including: testing; disclosure; sexual behaviour; and healthcare practice.

How many countries around the world have HIV criminalisation laws?

Since our last report, we found an increase in the number of countries that specifically allow for HIV criminalisation: these could be stand-alone HIV-specific criminal laws, part of omnibus HIV laws, or criminal and/or public health laws that specifically mention HIV.

Some of this increase is due to laws enacted since 2013 in Botswana, Cote d’lvoire, Nigeria, Uganda and Veracruz state (Mexico), and some is due to improved reporting and research methodology.

Our analysis shows that a total of 72 countries have adopted laws that specifically allow for HIV criminalisation, either because the law is HIV-specific, or because it names HIV as one (or more) of the diseases covered by the 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.

AHJ2-Where HIV criminalisation laws exist (as of April 2016)_6

How many countries have prosecuted people living with HIV?

Prosecutions for HIV non-disclosure, potential or perceived exposure and/or unintentional transmission have now been reported in 61 countries. This total increases to 105 jurisdictions when individual US states and Australian states / territories are counted separately.

Of the 61 countries, 26 applied HIV criminalisation laws, 32 applied general criminal or public health laws, and three (Australia, Denmark and United States) applied both HIV criminalisation and general laws.

AHJ2-Where HIV criminalisation laws exist (as of April 2016)_7

Where have prosecutions recently taken place?

We found reports of at least 313 arrests, prosecutions and/or convictions in 28 countries during the report period, covering 1 April 2013 to 30 September 2015.

Of note, we are now able to include data on reported prosecutions in Belarus and Russia, which are likely to have been taking place at least since the enactment of a Belarusian public health law in 1993 and a Russian HIV criminalisation law in 1995.

The highest number of cases during this period were reported in:

• Russia (at least 115) • United States (at least 104) • Belarus (at least 20) • Canada (at least 17) • France (at least 7) • United Kingdom (at least 6) • Italy (at least 6) • Australia (at least 5) • Germany (at least 5).

AHJ2-Where HIV criminalisation laws exist (as of April 2016)_8

HIV criminalisation in sub-Sarahan Africa of increasing concern

Where there was no HIV criminalisation at the start of the 21st century, 30 sub-Saharan African countries have now enacted overly broad and/or vague HIV-specific criminal statutes.

Most of these statutes are part of omnibus HIV-specific laws that also include protective provisions, such as those relating to non-discrimination in employment, health and housing. However, they also include a number of problematic provisions such as compulsory HIV testing and involuntary partner notification, as well as HIV criminalisation.

During the period covered by this report four countries in sub-Saharan Africa passed new HIV criminalisation laws: Botswana, Cote d’lvoire, Nigeria and Uganda.

Very few countries in Africa are now unaffected by problematic HIV criminalisation laws. The rise of reported prosecutions in Africa during this period (in Botswana, South Africa, Uganda, and especially Zimbabwe), along with the continuing, growing number of HIV criminalisation laws on this continent, is especially alarming.

AHJ2-Where HIV criminalisation laws exist (as of April 2016)_9

Where has advocacy improved legal environments?

Important and promising developments in case law, law reform and policy have taken place in many jurisdictions, most of which came about as a direct result of advocacy.

During the report period, although an additional 13 jurisdictions in nine countries proposed new HIV criminalisation laws, seven of these were not passed, primarily due to swift and effective advocacy against them at an early stage. Advocacy in another ten jurisdictions in seven countries challenged, improved or repealed HIV criminalisation laws.

The legal environment relating to HIV criminalisation has improved in a small number of countries in sub-Saharan Africa, most notably in Kenya. On 18 March 2015, Kenya’s High Court ruled that its HIV criminalisation provision – Section 24 of the HIV Prevention and Control Act 2006 – was unconstitutional because it was vague, overbroad and lacking in legal certainty, particularly in respect to the term ‘sexual contact’.

The Court also found it contravened Article 31 of the Kenyan Constitution which guarantees the right to privacy because the law created an obligation for people with HIV to disclose their status to their ‘sexual contacts’, with no corresponding obligation for recipients of such sensitive medical information to keep it confidential.

AHJ2-Where HIV criminalisation laws exist (as of April 2016)_10

Using science as an advocacy tool

Increased knowledge about reduced infectiousness due to antiretroviral therapy has led to advocacy that resulted in a number of jurisdictions revising or revisiting their criminal laws or prosecutorial policies relating to HIV criminalisation, although progress has been frustratingly slow.

Following the ‘Swiss statement’, published in January 2008, a growing number of courts, government ministries and prosecutorial authorities have accepted antiretroviral therapy’s impact on reducing the risk of both HIV exposure and transmission.

However, scientific advances alone will neither ‘end AIDS’ nor end HIV criminalisation. Although the impact of antiretroviral therapy on infectiousness is an important advocacy tool, it must be remembered that many people with HIV do not have access to treatment (or are unable to achieve an undetectable viral load when on treatment) and that everyone has a right to choose not to know their status and/or start treatment and should not be stigmatised nor considered ‘second class citizens’ should they wish to delay diagnosis or antiretroviral therapy.

More work required

Despite the many incremental successes of the past few years, much more work is required to strengthen advocacy capacity. This is why a coalition of seven organisations launched HIV Justice Worldwide in April 2016.

We also need to be aware that HIV criminalisation does not exist in vacuum, and is often linked to punitive laws and policies that impact sexual and reproductive health and rights, especially those aimed at sex workers and/or men who have sex with men and other sexual minorities.

And, bearing in mind the stigma faced by those with, for example, hepatitis C and concerns over the sexual transmission of the Ebola and Zika viruses, as we move forward to eliminate – or modernise – HIV criminalisation laws, we must ensure that our work does not inadvertently lead to the further criminalisation of other communicable and/or sexually transmitted infections.

Click on this link to read or download Advancing HIV Justice 2: Building momentum in global advocacy against HIV criminalisation.

A note about the limitations of the data

The data and case analyses in this report covers a 30-month period, 1 April 2013 to 30 September 2015. This begins where the original Advancing HIV Justice report – which covered the 18-month period, 1 September 2011 to 31 March 2013 – left off. Our data should be seen as an illustration of what may be a more widespread, but generally undocumented, use of the criminal law against people with HIV.

Australia: Southern Australia new legislation to soon enforce mandatory blood testing of offenders for spitting at, or biting police officers

MORE than 100 police officers are being spat at each year, exposing them to infectious diseases and raising the concerns of their union.

Police figures show 111 officers were spat at in 2013 and that total has remained steady each year since, although they refused to release new figures.

South Australian Police Association president Mark Carroll said he hoped new legislation, which is expected to soon become law, enforcing mandatory blood testing of offenders who assault police would protect his members.

“When, in the course of duty, officers are spat on, bitten or otherwise assaulted in a way involving an exchange of bodily fluids, it’s essential that these officers have access to blood samples from the assailant that can be tested,” he said.

The comments come after the sentencing of Brandon William Peter Humes who spat on an officer during an arrest him and told him ‘I don’t give a f — k … I have HIV AIDS and now you’ve got it too’.

In sentencing Humes, 27, this month District Court Judge Rauf Soulio said the officer had to restrain Humes which left him unable to immediately “decontaminate himself”.

“Your comments about HIV caused him great distress,” Judge Soulio said.

“He felt unable to hold his infant daughter, who was born prematurely, for fear of passing on a communicable disease.

“He had to deal with the fear of waiting for blood results, which were, fortunately, negative.”

Humes was sentenced to four years and six months jail with a non-parole period of two years for armed robbery and the spitting offence in June last year.

Also, Senior Sergeant Alison Coad contracted oral herpes after being spat on by a criminal.

SAPOL would not comment on the medical history of officers but said “this type of incident (spitting) is always of concern.”

“This type of behaviour is totally inappropriate and can result in offenders facing very serious charges,” a spokeswoman said.

The WA Police Union has recently requested officers be equipped with spit hoods because of a spike in incidents there.

Orginally published in The Advertiser

Turkmenistan: New law provides free HIV treatment but mandates HIV testing prior to marriage, and for people who use drugs, prisoners, blood donors and foreigners seeking work visas.

Turkmenistan has passed a law under which all people seeking a marriage license must be tested for HIV.

The law implies that anyone found to be infected with the virus that is the precursor to AIDS would be denied a marriage license.

Reports in state-controlled media on April 6 said the law was enacted “in order to create conditions for forming healthy families and avert the birth of HIV-infected children.”

Authoritarian Turkmenistan has given little public information about the extent of HIV infection in the country.

The new law also requires HIV tests for anyone suspected of using narcotics, foreigners seeking work visas, prisoners, and blood donors.

Under the legislation signed by President Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, the government will guarantee free treatment to people infected with AIDS.

In 2002, Turkmenistan’s Health Ministry claimed the country had only two cases of HIV and that both patients had been infected outside the Central Asian state.

QUOTES

Russian crime gangs find gays easy targets for blackmail

By VERONIKA SILCHENKO and IRINA TITOVA

Originally published by the Associated Press on Jun. 5 2016

Based on reporting by AP and AFP