california and south africa: gay rights and the state

Nomancotsho Pakade (BTM Link Programme coordinator)

It is interesting to note human rights issues in relation to homosexual rights particularly in developing countries, given the general advice to ‘look up to’ the developed, industrialized countries such as U.S.A and Europe.

The four US states, Arizona, Florida, Arkansas and California, after the American general elections in 2008, passed laws that ban homosexual acts.

Recently though Florida has been reported to be the first , out of the four, to ban the anti-gay laws.

Organizations such as the Family Equality Council have been mobilizing protests along with other LGBTI organizations since the introduction of Proposition 8 (anti-gay campaign) which became quite prominent during USA’s national elections on 4 November 2008.

California, out of all three states, seemingly serves a function of reminding LGBTI activists all over the world that the struggle continues. 

Allow me to elaborate. California for the past few years has been perceived as a gay-friendly state where homosexuals enjoyed adoption rights and were relatively free to express themselves up until the general elections allowed space for some citizens to mobilize anti-gay campaigns such as Proposition 8. 

These campaigns primarily infringe on the LGBTI individuals’ rights to freedom, expression, association and adoption.

The gist of the story is that California teaches us that the struggle for equal rights by the LGBTI society is continuous despite visible seemingly progressive laws.

Yet, even in South Africa where the law supports the LGBTI society and pledges to protect their rights; in reality this is a situation we are still striving for.

Although we should acknowledge the progress, simultaneously we ought to surface and challenge discrepancies between the law and reality.

The issue again is that the Californian LGBTI society had its rights stripped from them in a ‘politically correct’ manner, given the democratic procedures of the Proposition 8 Campaign, but not necessarily in humanitarian approach.

While in SA the rights are intact, they are overshadowed by an overwhelming degree of homophobic incidents as shown by a research done by the Human Science Research Council (HRSC) in 2008.

This research revealed that approximately 80 percent of South Africans have homophobic tendencies.

Despite the available data from the HRSC and reported cases of hate crimes and assaults, and yes even despite the Constitution that protects us all regardless of gender identity, sexual orientation, race and so on, our government backed down in a critical mandate.

The South African UN embassador Mr. Dumisani Khumalo insisted that SA supports the LGBTI society despite the fact that they did not sign the non-binding UN declaration that aimed to decriminalise homosexuality globally.

Signing the UN declaration aimed at decriminalizing homosexuality in a global context and should any country sign, It would mean that it automatically pressurizes other countries to decriminalize homosexuality.

So Khumalo was quoted by the Mail and Guardian on 13 January saying that by not signing, South Africa did not want to put other countries that are its allies under pressure, emphasizing international allies such as the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIA) that could be jeopardized if SA could have signed.
 
Perhaps international relations are more valuable at this time of the global recession.

Nonetheless, the LGBTI society deserves a response from their government pertaining to the UN declaration and SA refusing to sign the statement.

Only five African states signed, SA with its liberal democracy that allows Civil Union marriages was expected to sign.

Our ambivalent government and the upcoming elections make one wonder if SA will not become the next California.