LGBTQ+ Intolerance in Ghana Reaches Boiling Point 

Tensions within the West African country have risen following the recent restriction of LGBTQ+ rights, resurfacing the decades long discussion regarding the criminalization of same-sex conduct.   

Pride flag waving in the sky. Tim Bieler. Unsplash. 

The newly established office of nonprofit organization LGBT+ Rights Ghana was raided and searched by police last month, endangering one of the only safe spaces for LGBTQ+ people in the country. This raid came mere days after Ghanaian journalist Ignatius Annor came out as gay on live television, and many have speculated that the raid was in retaliation of that moment. 

Given Ghana’s criminalization of same-sex conduct, it is not a stretch to say that homophobia runs rampant and unchecked, especially when considering the widespread opposition from both government officials and religious figures regarding the construction of the center for LGBT+ Rights Ghana.   

The building has been under scrutiny since it first opened back in January. Only three weeks after opening its doors to the public, the organization had to temporarily close in order to protect its staff and visitors from angry protesters. The director of the organization, Alex Kofi Donkor, explained how the community “expected some homophobic organizations would use the opportunity to exploit the situation and stoke tensions against the community, but the anti-gay hateful reaction has been unprecedented.”   

This unprovoked suppression of basic freedoms indicates that LGBTQ+ intolerance in Ghana has reached a boiling point and is about to bubble over. 

Aerial shot of Accra, Ghana. Virgyl Sowah. Unsplash. 

News of the situation reached a handful of high-profile celebrities such as Idris Elba and Naomi Campbell, who joined 64 other public figures in publishing an open letter of solidarity with the Ghanaian LGBTQ+ community using #GhanaSupportsEquality. While prejudice has only recently garnered public attention due to the letter, blatant and widespread homophobia in Ghana has run rampant for years. 

According to a study conducted by the Human Rights Watch in 2017, hate crimes and assault due to one's sexual identity are regular occurrences in Ghana. Dozens of people have been attacked by mobs and even family members out of mere speculation that they were gay. Furthermore, the study found that for women, much of this aggressive homophobia was happening behind closed doors through the pressures of coerced marriage. 

Consider 24-year-old Khadija, who identifies as lesbian and will soon begin pursuing relationships with men due to the societal pressure for women to marry. Or 21-year-old Aisha, who was exiled by her family and sent to a “deliverance” church camp after she was outed as lesbian. 

Marriage pressures and intolerances are certainly prevalent in other countries as well, even in those often deemed progressive. The big difference is that in many countries, homophobic beliefs are slowly becoming less and less common. In Ghana, it seems as though these sentiments are normalized and held by the majority of people. 

The precedent for discrimination based on sexual orientation was set as early as 2011, when former Western Region minister Paul Evans Aidoo called for the immediate arrest of LGBTQ+ people in the area. The stigma that actions like this produced in Ghana have only been amplified over time when coupled with religious and cultural tensions. 

A rainbow forms above a home in Kumasi, Ghana. Ritchie. Unsplash. 

Many victims of hate crimes or abuse in Ghana reported that because of the codified homophobia in the country, they are unable to report their experiences to local authorities without putting themselves in danger. As a result, LGBTQ+ Ghanaians find themselves stuck in a perpetual cycle of making slight progress just for higher authorities to snatch it away. 

There have been countless opportunities for legalized discrimination to be addressed, and ever since current Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo assumed office in 2017, he has been under immense pressure to announce his official position on homosexuality. Four years later, he has still not done so.

Instead of embracing the shift toward more inclusive policies supported by LGBT+ Rights Ghana, the Ghanaian government appears to be succumbing to public pressures in an attempt to keep peace. What it fails to realize is that sweeping inequalities under the carpet doesn’t make them go away. It actually does quite the opposite. It heightens inequalities until they become absolutely impossible to avoid. Celebrity involvement in dismantling Ghana’s current system has caused quite the public reaction. It may end up being the spark that causes the Ghanaian government to reconsider its policies and begin to offer LGBTQ+ people the respect and protection they deserve. 

Zara Irshad

Zara is a third year Communication student at the University of California, San Diego. Her passion for journalism comes from her love of storytelling and desire to learn about others. In addition to writing at CATALYST, she is an Opinion Writer for the UCSD Guardian, which allows her to incorporate various perspectives into her work.

Fighting for Freedom: Uganda’s Election and the Internet Shutdown 

In southwestern Uganda, a wall with a faded poster of President Yoweri Museveni represents how long his presidency has continued. Adam Jones, Ph.D. - Global Photo Archive. CC BY-SA 2.0. 

In Uganda, a tumultuous victory for President Yoweri Museveni was declared on Jan. 17. This victory comes after weeks of tension and strife surrounding the election and its validity. Museveni won his sixth term in office at the age of 76 against Ugandan pop singer Robert Kyagulanyi who goes by the stage name “Bobi Wine.” Wine, 38, claims he ran as a voice for the youth, a significant position in the country as its median age is 16.   

Wine does not believe the electoral results were fair, despite the president claiming this election to be the “most cheating-free” in Uganda’s history. The claims of fraud are not a surprise as Museveni is notorious for his actions against opponents including jailing them and arresting protesters. The current suspicions around this election’s validity lie in two major factors: the large military and police presence during voting as well as the mass internet and social media shutdown in days leading up to the election. 

This is not the first time during elections that Museveni has shut down the internet or blocked messaging applications like WhatsApp. This internet shutdown severely damaged Wine’s campaign as he did not have access to campaigning through traditional outlets controlled by Museveni. Not only did it cost Wine his campaign, but it cost Uganda itself over $9 million according to Netblocks, an internet freedom monitor. CIPESA, an African internet nongovernmental organization, reports that both biometric voting systems and mobile money—a payment form relied upon by many Ugandans—were disrupted by the shutdown as well.                                      

Luyimbazi Nalukoola, a legal adviser, speaks with Bobi Wine. Mbowasport. CC BY-SA 4.0. 

Beyond the blocking of the internet come the physical barriers to voting put in place by Museveni. In a telephone interview with BBC World Service, Bobi Wine said he and his wife were being kept in their home by soldiers, with no allowance to leave. He said, "Nobody is allowed to leave or come into our house. Also, all journalists—local and international—have been blocked from accessing me here at home.” Members of Wine’s party are also experiencing this. One of the party’s Parliament members, Francis Zaake, was violently arrested on Friday while trying to access their Wine’s compound. He was beaten by security forces so badly that hospitalization was required, according to party spokesman Joel Ssenyonyi. 

Even Ugandan voters could not safely vote out of harm's way as the BBC's Patience Atuhaire reports from the capital, Kampala, that “as vote counting began, lorries carrying soldiers drove through the city and police and local defense units were also seen patrolling.” 

A group of men and women protesting the election in Uganda. DW Africa. YouTube. 

Many believe that this is life under an authoritarian regime, as Museveni’s presidency has often been called, and the utilization of internet blocks and physical force to suppress votes and muddy elections confirms this. So far, despite the turmoil, Ugandan people have not received assistance from international organizations designed to protect elections. African organizations are reporting conflicting observations as well, making it difficult to determine if intervention is appropriate. One group, the Africa Elections Watch coalition, said their 2,000 poll observers did observe irregularities, but the East African observer missions and those from the African Union said voting was largely peaceful. 

What is apparent is the suppression of Ugandan votes leading up to this election even if not witnessed firsthand by organizations. This is known to be true because in November, The Associated Press noted that at least 37 had died while protesting the election, and the number has grown but remained unconfirmed since. Now, many Ugandans continue their fight against an election result that is still unconfirmed to them despite their president’s claims. 

Renee Richardson

Renee is currently an English student at The University of Georgia. She lives in Ellijay, Georgia, a small mountain town in the middle of Appalachia. A passionate writer, she is inspired often by her hikes along the Appalachian trail and her efforts to fight for equality across all spectrums. She hopes to further her passion as a writer into a flourishing career that positively impacts others.

With Democracy on the Horizon, Uzbekistan Flirts with Freedom

Uzbekistan’s new attention to human rights and democratic ideals, along with the rapid boom in its tourism industry and steps toward religious tolerance, are potential signifiers of progress.

Tashkent, capital of Uzbekistan. Markus Biedermann. CC BY NC-ND 2.0.

Cradled between Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan lies at the heart of Central Asia. Uzbekistan’s population is predominantly Sunni Muslim, and adherents are considered the most devout in Central Asia. The capital, Tashkent, is full of signs of its rich Islamic heritage: historic mosques and mausoleums are scattered among Soviet-style towers.

The country’s complex and multifaceted history explains its diverse population. At the height of the Silk Road, cities located in present-day Uzbekistan such as Bukhara and Samarkand were trading hubs between the East and the West. It was through these centers that Arab traders brought Islam and a written alphabet to the region. After centuries of conquests and rivalry between Uzbek city-states, Russia swallowed up these states with the promise of protection in the early 19th century. It was established as the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic in 1924, where religion was suppressed and the population inflicted with forced collectivization. 

Ever since Uzbekistan’s independence in 1991, long-serving President Islam Karimov has largely avoided democratization while embracing diplomacy and investment from the global community. Despite his attempts to join the U.S. in its “war on terror,” Karimov was regularly criticized by the United Nations for his long record of human rights violations. His persecution of the large Muslim population in Uzbekistan could not be ignored by U.S. in light of the Andijan massacre, when at least 187 civilians were killed. After Karimov’s death in 2016, Uzbekistan seems to have emerged from three decades of isolation and autocratic rule.

Today, President Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s administration boasts of its progressive policies: Mirziyoyev advocates for freedom of the press, supports religious tolerance and disapproves of unjust imprisonment. Since the start of Mirziyoyev’s presidency in 2016, a few journalists have been spared incarceration, previously blocked media platforms were made accessible, and a number of political prisoners were released. These actions displayed Mirziyoyev’s ostensible devotion to human rights, which was bolstered by his emerging friendship with U.S. Rep. Trent Kelly, his interaction with nongovernmental organizations, and his government’s partnership with the Cotton Campaign, which combats unpaid cotton production in Uzbekistan. As a result, Uzbekistan was elected to the U.N. Human Rights Council for the first time in history this October. In an article found on the United Nations’ website, Uzbekistan is lauded for its “firm commitment to the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter and the universal declaration of human rights.” Although members of the U.N. carefully watch Mirziyoyev to ensure the establishment of these democratic ideals, Uzbekistan is now regarded as a country working toward greater freedom. 

There are complications involved in Mirziyoyev’s steps toward democratization. Even though Mirziyoyev has been vocal about eliminating Uzbekistan’s forced cotton labor, advocacy group Uzbek Forum found that forced labor persists in the country. Rather than setting up an institutional stronghold on the cotton industry, the government privatized the cotton sector, which only decentralized government-enforced labor by a few degrees. 

Mirziyoyev’s efforts toward modernizing the Uzbek capital of Tashkent have resulted in mass displacement of the city’s original inhabitants. Through the demolition of its buildings and the restructuring of its neighborhoods, the government has carried out a wide-scale gentrification of the city. Tashkent is now considered a travel destination, full of shining skyscrapers and new hotel districts. In order to bolster Uzbekistan’s economy, Mirziyoyev allowed visa-free travel for 30 days for visitors from 65 countries, including the United States.

These markers of progress are met with a mixture of emotions—the U.N. is enthusiastic about Mirziyoyev’s commitment to human rights, while Human Rights Watch remains skeptical of the legitimacy of these policies. The new seemingly democratic leadership of Mirziyoyev creates suspicion among Uzbeks and foreigners alike. Pushed by economic motivations, the president’s attempts to abide by the universal guidelines of human rights stir up hopes among Uzbeks for a freer future. 

Heather Lim

recently earned her B.A. in Literatures in English from University of California, San Diego. She was editor of the Arts and Culture section of The Triton, a student-run newspaper. She plans on working in art criticism, which combines her love of visual art with her passion for journalism.




Academic Freedom: Repressive Government Measures Taken Against Universities in More Than 60 Countries

Universities around the world are increasingly under threat from governments restricting their ability to teach and research freely. Higher education institutions are being targeted because they are the home of critical inquiry and the free exchange of ideas. And governments want to control universities out of fear that allowing them to operate freely might ultimately limit governmental power to operate without scrutiny.

My recent report, co-authored with researcher Aron Suba for the International Centre for Not-for-Profit Law, has found evidence of restrictive and repressive government measures against universities and other higher education institutions in more than 60 countries.

This includes government interference in leadership and governance structures to effectively create state-run institutions that are particularly vulnerable to government actions. It also includes the criminalisation of academics for their work as well as the militarisation and securitisation of campuses through the presence of armed forces or surveillance by security services. We also found evidence that students have been prevented from attending university because of their parents’ political beliefs, while others have been expelled or even imprisoned for expressing their own opinions.

Some of the more shocking examples of repressive practices have been widely publicised, such as the firing of thousands of academics and jailing of others in Turkey. But much of what is happening is at an “administrative” level – against individual institutions or the entire higher education system.

There are examples of governments that restrict access to libraries and research materials, censor books and prevent the publication of research on certain topics. Governments have also stopped academics travelling to meet peers, and interfered with curricula and courses. And our research also found governments have even interfered in student admissions, scholarships and grades.

Repression, intimidation

Hungary provides a particularly glaring recent example of government interference with university autonomy. The politicised targeting of the institution I work at –- Central European University –- has been well documented. But the government has also recently acted against academic life in the country more broadly. It has effectively prohibited the teaching of a course (gender studies) and taken control of the well-regarded Hungarian Academy of Social Sciences.

What makes the Hungarian example especially disturbing is that it is happening within the European Union – with seemingly no consequences for the government. This is despite the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights which states that: “The arts and scientific research shall be free of constraint. Academic freedom shall be respected.” Meanwhile the Hungarian government still has all the privileges of being an EU member state, which includes receiving large sums of EU money.

Public demonstration in front of the Hungarian Academy of Science building against the removal of the Academy Science Research Institute’s autonomy. Istvan Balogh/Shutterstock

The inexplicable failure by the EU to enforce its own standards is particularly troubling and helps to normalise this behaviour. Indeed, there are clear signs such repressive practices are spreading. Anti-human rights legislation, policy and practice that begins in one country is frequently copied in another. Anti-civil society legislation recently adopted in Hungary and Israel, for example, which aims to stop protests and minimise the number of organisations receiving funds from abroad, was previously adopted in Russia.

Repressive practices against universities are starting to spread in Europe. Earlier this year it was reported that the Ministry of Justice in Poland planned to sue a group of criminal law academics for their opinion on a new criminal law bill.

Academics in distress

The freedom of academics and university autonomy is not entirely without scrutiny. There are some excellent organisations, such as Scholars At Risk and the European University Association who actively monitor this sector. But, at an international level, university autonomy is rarely raised when governments’ human rights records are being examined. And there is no single organisation devoted to monitoring the range of issues identified in our recent report.

Without proper monitoring, universities, academics and students are even more vulnerable because there is little attention paid to these issues. And there is little pressure on governments not to undertake repressive measures at will.

Thousands demonstrate in central Budapest against higher education legislation seen as targeting the Central European University. Drone Media Studio/Shutterstock

A global monitoring framework is needed, underpinned by a clear definition of university autonomy. The UN and EU institutions also need to pay more attention to the dangers that such attacks on universities pose to democracy and human rights. A stronger line against governments who are acting in violation of existing standards should also be taken.

Universities should be autonomous in their operations and exercise self-governance. These institutions are crucial to the healthy functioning of democratic societies. Yet academic spaces are closing in countries around the world. This should be a concern for all. The time for action is now, before this trend becomes the new norm.

Kirsten Roberts Lyer is a Associate Professor of Practice, Acting Director Shattuck Centre, Central European University.

THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED ON THE CONVERSATION