Ugandan activists want donors to review programs after anti-gay law

As Uganda grapples with the fallout from the World Bank’s move to pause new lending over the country’s anti-gay law, activists are calling on other donors to back up their statements of outrage with action.

The bank’s Aug. 8 announcement to pause lending over the Anti-Homosexuality Act, which it said contradicted its values of “inclusion and non-discrimination” came after it sent a team to the capital city of Kampala earlier this year. In June, some 170 groups, including over 60 from Africa and some from Uganda, called for the World Bank to stop payment on current loans to Uganda and to suspend future lending until the “abhorrent” law is scrapped by a constitutional court, in a letter to President Ajay Banga.

“Our goal is to protect sexual and gender minorities from discrimination and exclusion in the projects we finance,” the bank said in its announcement.

The measure has received support from LGBTQ+ and civil society organizations around the world. These groups are now asking other donors to move from condemnation to action. But some donors are concerned that halting their programs would deprive the most vulnerable populations, including LGBTQ+ people, of vital assistance.

In a statement released last month, the Convening for Equality, or CFE, a Ugandan LGBTQ+ community-led coalition, applauded the bank for standing up to discrimination in Uganda.

“We hope that the decisive announcement will spur further commitments from others who support inclusive economic development and the protection of basic human rights to take concrete action in the face of Uganda’s horrific law,” said Clare Byarugaba from civil society organization Chapter Four Uganda, a co-convener of CFE, in a statement

Other activists told Devex that they welcomed the measure by the Washington, D.C.-based institution. “Though we shall equally feel the pinch in regards to the economy, it was a great move to task the Ugandan government to be accountable,” said Shantal Mulungi, executive director of Coloured Voice Truth.

But Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni stated that the country will not yield to the World Bank’s pressure and described bank officials as shallow and insufferable “imperialist actors” who do not know where to stop.

He also questioned the usefulness of foreign aid: “On the contrary, those loans and aid packages can be a source of distortion and stunted growth as you can see across Africa. If foreign aid and loans are a source of social-economic transformation, why the present growing crisis of even security and stability in Africa?”

Social protection safeguards

In 2014, the bank under Jim Yong Kim suspended a planned $90 million loan to Uganda meant to strengthen its health care system, just days after Museveni signed into law a bill prescribing harsh jail terms for homosexual offenses. This followed moves by Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway to freeze or alter aid programs for the country days earlier. That act was annulled by a court about six months later on a technicality.

The response to the new anti-gay legislation in Uganda, where homosexuality was already illegal under colonial-era laws, comes after Banga began his term on June 2 and falls under new environmental and social protection policies — or safeguards — approved in 2016.

These were the culmination of a multiyear effort to update social and environmental protection policies in World Bank projects for the first time in two decades. The safeguards were met with mixed responses. Fabrice Houdart, who spent 14 years at the bank, as a senior country officer for the Maghreb and president of the bank’s LGBTQ+ employee resource group — known as GLOBE — among other positions, left the institution in 2016 over the policy. He described this as a “source of tension.”

“There are anti-discrimination references in the safeguards,” Houdart, who is now executive director of the Association of LGBTQ+ Corporate Directors, told Devex in an interview. But  “there is no mention of LGBTQ+ people, sexual orientation or gender identity” in the safeguards, which make references to livestock.

“I counted the word ‘livestock’ five times [but] it includes very light mentions of non-discrimination against vulnerable groups,” he said.

A bank directive titled “Addressing risks and impacts on disadvantaged or vulnerable individuals or groups,” which takes into account “sexual orientation,” and “gender identity,” was issued and came into effect in March 2021, as required under the Environmental and Social Framework.

Paul Cadario, a distinguished fellow in global innovation at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy and former senior manager at the World Bank, said while the bank’s environmental and social safeguards don’t call for affirmative action on the part of the project that the bank is financing, there is always a concern that social or political attitudes might deny access to people that would otherwise qualify for support.

“If people excluded themselves because they were afraid of being discriminated against when identifying themselves to services providers, then clearly you have a targeting problem and a beneficiary problem in what the bank is financing,” he said.

More action needed

Ugandan LGBTQ+ activist Frank Mugisha told Devex that local groups are now waiting to see what other donors do. “We want them to do more, some have done nothing at all,” he said. “It is hypocritical,” Mugisha said, adding that many had expressed condemnation when the law was enacted on May 29.

Mugisha said the activists’ position on donors “is mostly asking for reviewing aid, not cutting aid, given the fact that the law is in place.” He pointed to CFE guidelines to international partners, which encourages an immediate review of aid for organizations and government institutions that have failed to show respect for human rights and those that have actively supported the act.

The guidelines do not support overall budget cuts for essential services, cancellation of NGO or civil society contracts that provide lifesaving health services or other important social services for people, with the exception of civil society groups that are not supportive of nullifying the law, and in that case, funding must be reprogrammed to LGBTIQ+ supportive groups.

“Donors should be immediately announcing comprehensive reviews of all aspects of their funding to Uganda, and pausing, reprogramming, and/or reducing funding based on review outcomes,” the guidelines say.

After a version of the bill was passed through Parliament in March, activists warned that the legislation, which includes the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality,” which it defines as same-sex acts involving people living with HIV or minors, among others, would essentially criminalize inclusive HIV programs and undermine the country’s efforts to end AIDS by 2030. The law would essentially make some U.S. President’s Emergency Plans for AIDS Relief-funded programs “completely illegal,” activists said.

In May, some Ugandan activists in the European Union called on it to cut aid over the law. But an EU official said the bloc considers that a suspension of financial support to Uganda would deprive the most vulnerable populations, including LGBTQ+ people, of vital assistance. The EU decided against cutting aid to Uganda or imposing sanctions on the country in 2014 in response to the then law. Instead, it has boosted support to Ugandan civil society and human rights defenders, with an ongoing increase in support for communication, psychosocial counseling, and meeting spaces for civil society organizations.

Some countries have also taken this stance. Denmark’s development engagement in Uganda for 2023-2027, under the Danish Strategic Framework for Uganda, was worth about 650 million Danish krone (over $94 million). “The support mainly [goes] to climate adaptation initiatives for smallholders, to refugees and their host communities, and to civil society working for democracy and human rights, including the rights of LGBT+ persons,” the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in an email to Devex.

“Therefore, introducing cuts in Danish development assistance, as a response to the Anti-Homosexuality Act, would only affect the most vulnerable people in Uganda.” Denmark has instead increased support to organizations working to ensure the protection and safety of LGBTQ+ persons, via support to DefendDefenders, and boosted funding for Danish civil society organizations working with partners in Uganda, the ministry said.

Belgium, through its development minister Caroline Gennez, said in June that “business as usual is out of the question” and that the country would not rule out sanctions. Norway, in an email to Devex, said that it was deeply worried about the situation for LGBTQ+ people in Uganda. Ane Jørem, a press spokesperson from the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Norway was reviewing its development assistance to projects in Uganda.

The Netherlands, which has stressed that it is part of the Equal Rights Coalition, has already scrapped financial support to the long-running Ugandan Justice, Law and Order sector.

“We aim to continue supporting the Ugandan people, by exploring how to best support civil society and multilateral institutions,” said Louise Pfältzer, spokesperson for the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in an email. “We will uphold our support to human rights defenders (including LGBTIQ+ organizations), and are aiming for additional support.”

The United Kingdom said in July that it “strongly condemns the Government of Uganda’s decision to sign the Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023 into law.” The government had raised it with its Ugandan counterparts, development minister Andrew Mitchell said then. “The British High Commission in Uganda remains engaged with the LGBT+ community and human rights defenders to understand the impact of the Act on the safety of LGBT+ people and support their efforts to protect the rights of vulnerable communities,” he said.

U.S. President Joe Biden called for the “immediate repeal” of the new law after it was passed. Biden said that he had asked the National Security Council to assess the law’s consequences on all aspects of the country’s engagement with Uganda, including its capacity to safely deliver services via PEPFAR assistance and investments. The U.S. also announced in June that it would impose visa restrictions on “Ugandan officials and other individuals responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic process in Uganda, abusing human rights, including those of LGBTQI+ persons, or engaging in corrupt practices.”

Amid the fallout, four people appeared in a Kampala court charged with engaging in homosexuality as World Bank officials visited Uganda again.

“MPs behind the sweeping, far-reaching, & repressive anti-homosexuality law are all over the place holding press conferences because they know the World Bank leadership in town,” said human rights lawyer Nicholas Opiyo on X on Aug. 22. “They want the bank not to listen to victims of the law, & not to conduct independent third-party monitoring of the ongoing violations under the law. We would not be here if they knew better – the law is unhelpful. Simply repeal it.”

Two men were later charged with “aggravated homosexuality” and will appear in court later this month.

By Amy Fallon