Uganda has emerged as one of the nations with the most stringent legislation targeting the LGBT community following the enactment and signing of the Anti-Homosexuality Act in 2023 by President Yoweri Museveni.
This new regulation dramatically intensifies penalties for same-sex relationships, establishing life imprisonment as the standard punishment for consensual homosexual acts. In cases classified as “aggravated homosexuality,” the law goes further, allowing for the death penalty.
While homosexuality was already criminalized under colonial-era provisions in Uganda’s Penal Code, this legislation represents a significant escalation in both scope and severity, broadening the definition of offenses and introducing harsher consequences.
The Anti-Homosexuality Act defines “homosexuality” broadly, criminalizing any sexual relations between individuals of the same biological sex, with life imprisonment as the prescribed penalty upon conviction. “Aggravated homosexuality” encompasses a range of scenarios deemed more severe, such as repeated offenses (labeled as “serial offenders”), acts involving minors, individuals with disabilities, or those of advanced age (defined as 75 years or older), as well as cases where HIV transmission occurs through same-sex conduct or where coercion or rape is involved.
Attempted acts carry up to 10 years in prison, while “promotion” of homosexuality—including advocacy, funding LGBT organizations, operating groups that normalize such conduct, or even providing premises for related activities—can result in up to 20 years imprisonment and fines. The law also touches on broader prohibitions, such as child grooming or aiding and abetting, further entrenching a comprehensive framework against perceived LGBT-related activities.
President Museveni, who has led Uganda since 1986, assented to the bill on May 29, 2023, after parliament passed it overwhelmingly in March with near-unanimous support. Supporters within the government and parliament framed the legislation as a necessary defense of Uganda’s cultural values, traditional family structures, and national sovereignty. Authorities argue that the law protects societal morals against what they describe as foreign-imposed influences that threaten the African way of life.
In public statements and addresses, Museveni and parliamentary figures have emphasized preserving “the culture, values, and aspirations of our people,” portraying the measure as resistance to Western pressure and a reaffirmation of Uganda’s independence in moral and legal matters. This narrative resonates with segments of the population and political elite who view homosexuality as incompatible with local customs and religious beliefs predominant in the country.
The passage of the law has ignited fierce international debate on human rights. Global organizations, Western governments, and human rights advocates have condemned it as one of the world’s harshest anti-LGBT measures. The United Nations, including Secretary-General António Guterres and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, expressed deep concern, describing the provisions as discriminatory and a violation of fundamental rights to privacy, non-discrimination, and life. The European Union, the United States under President Joe Biden, and others labeled it a “tragic violation” of universal human rights, with calls for immediate repeal.
Responses included visa restrictions, travel advisories, redirection of aid, and suspension of certain funding mechanisms, such as the World Bank’s halt on new loans, citing conflicts with non-discrimination principles. Critics argue that the death penalty for certain offenses contravenes international norms against capital punishment for consensual adult acts and exacerbates persecution.
Domestically, LGBT activists and allies have decried the legislation as a “dark day” for human rights in Uganda. They warn of heightened risks of violence, arbitrary arrests, evictions, and mob attacks, with reports of increased harassment and displacement following the law’s enactment. Organizations providing support to the community have faced closures, raids, and operational challenges, further isolating vulnerable individuals.
International health organizations, including UNAIDS, PEPFAR, and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, have raised alarms about the public health implications. Uganda has made notable progress in combating HIV/AIDS over decades, with significant reductions in prevalence through targeted outreach, testing, and treatment programs, particularly among key populations like men who have sex with men. However, experts warn that the law’s severe penalties and the criminalization of “promotion” activities could deter people from seeking medical services due to fear of arrest, outing, or reprisals.
Confidentiality concerns, stigma, and discrimination in healthcare settings may drive individuals underground, reducing access to prevention tools like pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), counseling, and antiretroviral therapy. Community-led monitoring has already shown declines in service uptake among affected groups post-enactment, with fewer referrals, lower participation in support programs, and reports of harassment toward outreach workers. This rollback threatens to reverse hard-won gains in the fight against HIV, potentially leading to increased transmissions and AIDS-related deaths.
The legislation’s defenders counter that it does not target health services directly and that Uganda remains committed to public health. Yet the chilling effect appears evident, as fear permeates communities and disrupts essential outreach.
This decision has placed Uganda at the center of a broader global conversation about the balance between cultural sovereignty, traditional values, and universal human rights. While proponents see it as a legitimate expression of national identity and protection of societal norms, opponents view it as state-sanctioned discrimination that endangers lives, undermines health initiatives, and isolates the country diplomatically. The long-term consequences—social, health-related, and economic—continue to unfold, highlighting deep divisions over identity, rights, and governance in contemporary Africa.
