Senegal: Lawyers challenge phone searches and lack of legal counsel in LGBTQ+ cases

Senegal’s anti-homosexuality law: violations of defendants’ rights are causing concern among lawyers and NGOs

In Senegal, a month and a half after the enactment of a law toughening penalties for homosexuality, and with over a hundred people having been arrested for alleged ‘unnatural acts’ and some accused of wilful transmission of HIV, lawyers are concerned about violations of defendants’ rights, including unauthorised searches of mobile phones, interrogation reports ending up in the press, and the absence of legal representation for a number of those arrested.

with RFI correspondent in Dakar, Léa-Lisa Westerhoff

The lobby of the High Court in Dakar is bustling with people…

No case involving “unnatural acts” is being heard that day, but Maître Kandiak François Senghor wishes to discuss the conditions under which one of his clients, arrested for alleged homosexuality in early February, was questioned at the Keur Massar police station.

“The commander had confiscated and searched his mobile phone without his consent. And… in his office, he forced him to waive his right to a lawyer – that’s not right! It was also he who leaked details of the investigation to the press – it’s shocking! ‘Maître Senghor assures us that this violation of the right to legal representation is a first since 2016 and the entry into force of the UMOA regulations governing the legal profession in Senegal, but it is far from being the only one,’ explains Maître Abdou Dieng. “In the cases involving me regarding acts against nature, at least 100 people have been arrested, and of those 100, not a single one was assisted by a lawyer during questioning – that is not legal! ”

On 10 February, the two lawyers therefore filed a complaint against the brigade commander of the Keur Massar police station for procedural violations during the interrogation of their two clients: the right to be assisted by a lawyer, as well as the searching of phones without consent, and the breach of medical confidentiality with medical records published in the press.

For Mr Abdou Dieng, urgent action is needed: “Leaking information about a person’s serological status is dangerous, as it is confidential, yet it is all over TV programmes and in the press! It is very serious, in truth! ”

Filed on 16 February, the complaint is still under investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office at the Dakar Court of Appeal.

For its part, the NGO Amnesty International is also concerned about these mass arrests of suspected homosexuals, which are, for the most part, based on searches of mobile phones.

Loi anti-homosexualité au Sénégal: les violations des droits des prévenus inquiètent avocats et ONG

Au Sénégal, un mois et demi après la promulgation d’une loi qui durcit les peines pour homosexualité, et alors que plus d’une centaine de personnes ont été arrêtés pour « actes contre nature » présumés et certains accusés de transmission volontaire du VIH, des avocats s’inquiètent de cas de violation du droit des prévenus avec des fouilles de téléphone portables non consenties, des procès-verbaux d’interrogatoire qui atterrissent dans la presse et l’absence d’avocat pour un certain nombre de personnes arrêtées.

avec la correspondante RFI à Dakar, Léa-Lisa Westerhoff

Le hall du tribunal de grande instance de Dakar bruisse de monde…

Aucune affaire d’« acte contre nature » n’est jugée ce jour-là, mais maître Kandiak François Senghor veut revenir sur les conditions dans lesquelles l’un de ses clients, arrêté pour homosexualité présumée début février, a été auditionné au commissariat de Keur Massar.

« Le commandant avait confisqué et fouillé son portable sans son consentement. Et… dans son bureau, il l’a contraint à renoncer à son droit à un avocat, ce n’est pas normal ! C’est également lui qui a fait fuiter les éléments de l’enquête dans la presse, c’est choquant ! »Maître Senghor l’assure, cette violation du droit d’être assisté par un avocat est une première depuis 2016 et l’entrée en vigueur du règlement UMOA qui régit la profession d’avocat au Sénégal, mais elle est loin d’être la seule, nous explique Maître Abdou Dieng. « Pour les dossiers qui me concernent d’acte contre nature, on est au moins à 100 personnes arrêtées, et sur ces 100 personnes aucune n’a été assistée par un avocat au moment de l’interrogatoire, ce n’est pas légal ! »

Le 10 février dernier les deux avocats ont donc porté plainte contre le commandant de brigade du commissariat de Keur Massar pour des violations de procédure lors de l’interrogatoire de leurs deux clients : celle d’être assisté par un avocat, mais aussi des fouilles de téléphone sans consentement, ou encore la violation du secret médical avec des statuts médicaux publiés dans la presse.

Pour maître Abdou Dieng il est urgent d’agir : « Distiller des informations sur l’état sérologique d’une personne, c’est quand même dangereux car c’est un secret or c’est partout sur les plateaux de tv et dans la presse ! C’est très grave en vérité ! »

Saisie depuis le 16 février, la plainte est toujours en cours d’instruction devant le parquet général de la cour d’appel de Dakar.

De son côté, l’ONG Amnesty international s’inquiète, elle aussi, de ces arrestations en série d’homosexuels présumés qui reposent, pour la plupart, sur des fouilles de téléphones portables.

Senegal: Legal and human rights concerns mount in LGBT and HIV Criminalisation cases

Relatives of the defendants denounce “a violation of the rights of the defense”

At the beginning of 2026, in the suburbs of Dakar (Pikine-Guédiawaye), a homosexual scandal shook Senegal. Known as the “Pope Cheick Diallo Case”, this file concerns alleged acts “unnatural acts, association of criminals, voluntary transmission of HIV/AIDS, and money laundering”. After searches that led to the seizure of condoms and lubricants, several people, whose cases of HIV positivity were detected, were taken into custody.

Three months after the outbreak of this case, the daily Les Echos maintains that “more than 90 people have been arrested to date, but to date, about fifteen defendants have not been heard on the merits”. Faced with this situation, relatives of the defendants denounce “a violation of the rights of the defense”.

The entourage of the suspects also denounces a violation of the presumption of innocence, with excerpts from the hearings that are constantly exposed on social networks and in the press. “In the search for evidence for the manifestation of the truth, justice tramples on the rules, according to them,” Les Echos always reports.

As a reminder, the Pape Cheick Diallo case (name of a famous TV host) allowed the arrest of several public figures. Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko, at the podium of the National Assembly, had also denounced the violation of the secrets of the investigation and called for the opening of a disciplinary investigation.

Senegal: Arrests and breach of medical confidentiality trigger drop in HIV testing and treatment attendance

“Violation of medical confidentiality”: in Senegal, caregivers worried about allegations against homosexuals with HIV

In Senegal, people have been incriminated for their homosexuality and accused of HIV transmission. These arrests follow the announcement by Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko of the tightening of the law penalizing “unnatural acts”. Since these arrests, the actors in the fight against AIDS have seen a decrease in attendance at screening centers.

“Arrest for homosexuality: serious cases of unnatural acts with voluntary transmission of HIV/AIDS,” headlined the Senegalese daily Les Échos, on February 9. About thirty people have been accused of transmitting HIV and incriminated for their homosexuality, which is prohibited by law. The Senegalese government has just toughened this legislation on February 24. These arrests frighten patients with the virus, who no longer go to the Dakar screening center.

“Patients are afraid of being arrested and stigmatized,” explains Dr. Rassoul Diouf, at Fane Hospital, one of Senegal’s main health centers. Usually, this facility welcomes dozens of patients daily for HIV testing and monitoring. But in recent weeks, Dr. Rassoul Diouf has seen a significant drop in consultations.”The convocations for appointments are difficult to happen. We call them but there is reluctance,” he explains to TV5MONDE.

Breach of medical confidentiality

For the actors in the fight against AIDS, this disclosure constitutes a “violation of medical confidentiality“. The National AIDS Council recalls that a law in Senegal protects the identity of people with HIV.

“On an ethical level, this is not normal, but even less on a legal level,” says Dr. Safiatou Thiam, executive secretary of the National Council for the fight against AIDS. “HIV has the particularity of being framed by a law that prohibits the disclosure of people’s status. We do not know how or by what process medical results ended up in the public square,” she explains to TV5MONDE.

Misinformation and confusion about HIV transmission

Actors in the fight against AIDS also deplore confusion about the modes of transmission of the virus. However, Senegal has long been cited as an example for the means put in place to fight HIV. Since the end of the 1990s, the country made treatments accessible. “At the beginning of the epidemic [of HIV, ed.], many countries refused to recognize its existence. But Senegal said: not only does HIV exist, but I will treat it,” explains Dr. Khoudia Sow, doctor and anthropologist.

“When a person follows his treatment properly, he becomes undetectable and can no longer transmit the virus. On the other hand, if these people interrupt their treatment for fear of stigmatization, the risk is that in the short term new transmissions will appear,” she confides. Currently, the HIV prevalence rate in Senegal is estimated at 0.3%, one of the lowest in the region. However, if patients stop taking their treatment, for fear of stigma, this rate could increase in Senegal.

Senegal: CNLS issues guidelines on medical confidentiality and HIV care in prisons

Medical records and HIV: The CNLS imposes a strict ban targeting the prison administration

Health management in places of deprivation of liberty in Senegal is undergoing a major overhaul. In response to human rights issues, the National Council for the Fight against AIDS (CNLS) has issued a strategic guidance note detailing care protocols. According to information reported by the newspaper Le Quotidien, this approach aims to establish clear rules regarding the monitoring of people living with the virus in prisons.

The central point of this directive concerns medical confidentiality. The Executive Secretariat of the CNLS prohibits the disclosure of prisoners’ HIV status. In practical terms, the medical records of prisoners living with HIV (Pvvih) must be kept separate from the records managed by the prison administration. These documents remain the sole responsibility of the medical staff assigned to the infirmary.

The CNLS text also includes a scientific clarification intended for the day-to-day management of detention. The document specifies that an inmate carrying the virus can live in the community and share the same cell as other inmates without any risk of transmission.

From a medical standpoint, the protocol applied is in line with international standards, guaranteeing inmates the same care as the general population. Consultations are carried out in health centres or specialised hospital services, under the supervision of the prison medical service. Our editorial team also notes that HIV testing in prison is not compulsory; it is offered with the prisoner’s free consent, after psychosocial support.

The system provides for a full medical assessment upon incarceration. If the new arrival is already undergoing antiretroviral treatment, contact is established with their treating physician to prevent any interruption in treatment, a known factor in virus resistance. This initial examination also makes it possible to identify other comorbidities such as diabetes, hypertension or substance use disorders.

To support the implementation of these guidelines, the CNLS is rolling out training and advocacy sessions in the field. These meetings are aimed directly at professionals working in prisons, including senior nurses, warders and directors of detention and correctional centres (MACs).

Medical records and HIV: The CNLS fixe une interdiction stricte ciblant l’administration pénitentiaire

La gestion de la santé dans les lieux de privation de liberté au Sénégal fait l’objet d’un recadrage précis. Face aux enjeux liés aux droits humains, le Conseil National de Lutte contre le Sida (Cnls) a diffusé une note d’orientation stratégique détaillant les protocoles de prise en charge. Selon les informations rapportées par le journal Le Quotidien, cette démarche vise à instaurer des règles claires concernant le suivi des personnes vivant avec le virus au sein des prisons.

Le point central de cette directive concerne le secret médical. Le Secrétariat exécutif du Cnls pose l’interdiction de divulguer le statut sérologique des détenus. Concrètement, le dossier médical d’un détenu vivant avec le VIH (Pvvih) doit être impérativement séparé des dossiers gérés par l’Administration pénitentiaire. Ce document reste sous la responsabilité exclusive du personnel soignant affecté à l’infirmerie.

Le texte du Cnls intègre également une mise au point scientifique destinée à la gestion quotidienne de la détention. Le document précise qu’un détenu porteur du virus peut vivre en communauté et partager la même cellule que les autres pensionnaires sans aucun risque de transmission.

Sur le plan médical, le protocole appliqué s’aligne sur les normes internationales, garantissant aux détenus les mêmes soins qu’à la population générale. Les consultations s’effectuent dans des centres de santé ou des services hospitaliers spécialisés, sous la supervision du service médical carcéral. Notre rédaction note également que le dépistage du VIH au sein de la prison n’est soumis à aucune obligation ; il est proposé avec le libre consentement du détenu, après un accompagnement psychosocial.

Le dispositif prévoit une évaluation médicale complète dès l’incarcération. Si le nouvel arrivant suit déjà un traitement antirétroviral, une liaison avec son médecin traitant est établie pour prévenir toute rupture thérapeutique, un facteur connu de résistance au virus. Cet examen initial permet dans le même temps d’identifier d’autres comorbidités telles que le diabète, l’hypertension ou les troubles liés à l’usage de substances.

Pour accompagner l’application de ces directives, le Cnls déploie des sessions de formation et de plaidoyer sur le terrain. Ces rencontres ciblent directement les professionnels intervenant en milieu carcéral, notamment les infirmiers major, les surveillants et les directeurs des Maisons d’arrêt et de correction (Mac).

US: New Williams Institute analysis shows HIV criminalization disproportionately targets Black communities

Black Americans are disproportionately criminalized for living with HIV.

Through “heightened surveillance, arrest, and conviction,” Black Americans are more likely to be criminalized for their HIV.

Black people in the U.S. aren’t just more likely to have HIV — they’re more likely to be criminalized for it.

Black Americans accounted for about 38 percent of new HIV diagnoses and 39 percent of people living with HIV in 2023, according to a report from the Williams Institute, despite making up around 12 percent of the population.

Black women had the highest HIV diagnosis rate at 19.6 per 100,000, which is about 11 times the rate for white women at 1.8 per 100,000. Black boys and men ages 13 to 24 accounted for 47 percent of all new diagnoses among youth, while white boys and men made up just three percent.

Even with higher rates of infection, Black Americans are less likely to be on medications that treat HIV, with just 64 percent receiving care and 53 percent virally suppressed. They are also less likely to have health insurance, as 12.3 percent of Black adults ages 19 to 64 did not have health insurance in 2024, compared to 6.8 percent of white adults.

Black Americans are more likely to be criminalized for their HIV as well, as they are often subjected to “heightened surveillance, arrest, and conviction within the criminal legal system,” according to the report. In 64 percent of states analyzed, they faced higher rates of arrest than their share of people living with HIV. For example, Black people in California were 6 percent of the state population and 18 percent of people living with HIV, but 39 percent of HIV-related arrests.

They’re also more likely to face harsh post-conviction penalties like sex offender registration. In Tennessee, Black people were 17 percent of the state’s population and 55 percent of people living with HIV, but 74 percent of people on the sex offender registry with an HIV-related conviction.

“Most HIV criminal laws were enacted before effective HIV treatment and prevention tools became widely available,” said Nathan Cisneros, director of the HIV Criminalization Project at the Williams Institute. “In recent years, there has been a push to reform or repeal these laws as policymakers and the public increasingly recognize that these laws can discourage testing, increase stigma, and deepen disparities — especially for Black Americans.”

Canada: Google refuses to suppress name-based search results in dismissed HIV criminalisation case

Google wants to keep HIV status of underage Canadian in search results

Canada’s data protection authority wants to enforce a version of the “right to be forgotten” that is reduced to a specific risk. Google is not playing along.

Google refuses to accept the Canadian version of the“right to be forgotten“, even though it is significantly reduced and better protected against abuse than the European version. Google’s refusal poses a problem for the monarchy’s weak data protection authority. The starting point of the dispute is media reports found via Google’s search engine about the arrest and prosecution of an HIV-positive, underage person, probably over a decade ago.

The person was once accused of not disclosing their HIV status prior to sexual contact. Canadian media reported on this, citing the person’s full name and sexual orientation. The data protection authority does not consider the reports to be a violation of the law.

However, the charges against the minor were quickly dropped because the results of the investigation showed that the person had never posed a risk to the health of others. Canada’s federal prosecutor generally does not prosecute cases where there was no realistic risk of infection. But if you enter the person’s name into Google’s search engine, you will still find the media reports about the arrest and charges for the alleged sexual offense at the top.

The consequences for the person are dire: physical attacks, difficulties finding work, social ostracism. She would like hyperlinks to outdated media reports to no longer appear in Google’s search results when her name is entered. When Google refused, the complainant turned to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada in 2017.

Years of dispute over jurisdiction

The Office opened proceedings, but Google claimed that the authority was not allowed to investigate the search engine. It was used for journalistic purposes, for which the Canadian federal data protection law PEPIDA provides an exception. The authority went to court and won a declaration at both first (2021) and second instance (2023) that “every part” of the search engine is covered by the Canadian federal privacy law PEPIDA, especially as the search does not exclusively serve journalistic purposes.

Nevertheless, Google still refuses to suppress the hyperlinks to the media reports when a person’s name is entered. The authority is by no means demanding that the media reports be deleted from the index altogether. They may continue to be linked when other search terms are entered, but this should no longer happen when the name of the person concerned is entered. To this end, the data protection authority refers to a central rubber paragraph of the law (PEPIDA paragraph 5 section 3): “An organization may collect, use or disclose personal information only for purposes that a reasonable person would consider are appropriate in the circumstances.” (E.g.: Organizations may collect, use and disclose personal information only for purposes that a reasonable person would consider appropriate in the circumstances).

Personal protection vs public interest

Under certain limited conditions, it follows that search results may be unlawful: If the search results are likely to cause significant harm to an individual, and this outweighs the public interest in the search results when the individual’s name is entered.

In this particular case, this public interest, if any, was low because the person in question was not a person of public interest and the media reports revolved around highly sensitive information about private life, not public activities or working life. Furthermore, the charges were quickly suspended; according to current guidelines, they would hardly ever have been brought.

Although there is public discourse about criminal sanctions for undisclosed HIV status, the public can find the specific media reports via thematic search terms; the ability to find them via a person’s name does not contribute significantly to the discourse.

Most of the linked articles would report incompletely and misleadingly, as they do not mention the subsequent resting of the charges. They also fail to mention the federal and provincial guidelines for not pressing charges without risk of infection. Without this context, readers could gain a false impression, which could seriously harm the person named. In general, the articles were published many years ago, which also reduces the public interest in linking to them.

Infringement remains without consequences

By continuing to disseminate the links after entering the person’s name, Google permanently violated the cited legal provision. However, the Canadian Federal Data Protection Agency can neither impose fines nor impose conditions; it is limited to recommendations. Google does not want to implement these.

“Individuals have the right under Canadian privacy law to have information about themselves removed from online search results after entering their name in certain circumstances where there is a significant risk of harm that outweighs the public interest in that information being made available through such a search,” says Canada’s Privacy Commissioner Philippe Dufresne. His authority will “consider all available options to ensure Google’s compliance with the law.” What this will look like remains to be seen.

Comparison with Europe

The Canadian data protection authority’s access to a “right to be forgotten” has the advantage over the European model of less potential for abuse. Legal web content is not to be deleted from the search index as a matter of principle; rather, the focus is on protecting those affected. Anyone searching specifically for such content should not be able to easily find content that is dangerous for those affected, while other search terms will continue to lead to the target. The fact that a person’s name is also listed there has little effect on people who are largely unknown.

In the European model, the webpage as a whole is regularly filtered out of the search results, regardless of the search term. This leads to abuse if user comments are published on the same webpage. Anyone who doesn’t like a media report, for example, writes a “drunk” post underneath it. The poster is soon “embarrassed”, which is why he requests the search engines to suppress the webpage. The search engines have to obey. The operators of the affected website never find out about the delisting, which the European “affected party” has enforced without a court ruling.

New global data reveals rising HIV criminalisation amid stalling legal reforms

The HIV Justice Network published new data this week showing a troubling rise in the number of people criminalised for HIV non-disclosure, potential or perceived exposure, or unintentional transmission in 2024 and the first half of 2025. As legal reforms appear to be stalling, discriminatory prosecutions, harsh sentences, and misuse of outdated laws continue to impact people with HIV and the HIV response.

The figures, presented at the 13h IAS Conference on HIV Science (IAS 2025) in Kigali, Rwanda, are drawn from the Global HIV Criminalisation Database. The database documents criminal cases and legal developments involving HIV-specific or general criminal laws worldwide.

In 2024, at least 65 HIV criminalisation cases were reported across 22 countries – up from 57 in 2023 and 50 in 2022. Russia (25 cases) and the United States (11) led the global tally, followed by Uzbekistan, Spain, Argentina, Belarus, Senegal, and Singapore. For the first time, prosecutions were documented in Panama and Uruguay.

The upward trend continued into 2025, with 48 cases reported in just the first six months. Uzbekistan (28) and Russia (9) again accounted for the majority, alongside new cases in the U.S., Canada, and Argentina. However, the actual number of cases is likely much higher, particularly in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the United States, where civil society organisations report many cases go undocumented.

“These cases show that HIV criminalisation remains a global crisis,” said Edwin J. Bernard, Executive Director of the HIV Justice Network. “Far too often, people living with HIV are prosecuted not for causing harm, but simply for living with a health condition – often in ways that are unscientific, discriminatory, and deeply unjust.”

                 Download the poster by clicking on the image

The report highlights the intersection of HIV criminalisation with racism, homophobia, gender-based discrimination, and systemic inequality. In Senegal, for example, prosecutions have disproportionately targeted LGBTQ+ individuals. In the U.S., criminal laws continue to be weaponised against communities of colour, even in cases involving no risk of transmission – such as spitting, or sex with an undetectable viral load.

One of the most alarming cases occurred in South Africa, where a former soldier was sentenced to life plus ten years for rape and attempted murder after failing to disclose his HIV status to a consenting partner – despite no evidence of intent or actual transmission. Advocates warn that such cases equate HIV non-disclosure with sexual violence and undermine decades of public health and human rights gains.

Yet, amidst the setbacks, 2024/2025 also brought some signs of hope. Maryland and North Dakota fully repealed their HIV-specific laws, while Tennessee removed mandatory sex offender registration for HIV-related convictions. Mexico City and Colima repealed vague “danger of contagion” laws, and Ukraine’s parliament voted to remove HIV from its criminal code.

In Zimbabwe, community activism helped block a proposal to re-criminalise HIV transmission. However, a new law was introduced criminalising the deliberate transmission of STIs to children, including HIV – raising fears it could be used against mothers living with HIV, particularly in breastfeeding cases.

Despite these advances, HIV criminalisation remains widespread. A total of 83 countries still have HIV-specific laws, and 23 countries reported prosecutions in this period using either HIV-specific or general laws. The HIV Justice Network warns that without urgent action, the world is unlikely to meet UNAIDS’ target of reducing punitive laws to below 10% of countries by 2030.

“The path forward must be rooted in science, rights, and community leadership,” Bernard said. “We must end laws that punish people for their status, and instead build legal systems that support health, dignity, and justice.”

EPO622 Recent progress and setbacks in HIV criminalisation around the world by Edwin J Bernard, Sylvie Beaumont, and Elliot Hatt was presented at IAS 2025 by Paul Kidd at 13th IAS Conference on HIV Science in Kigali, Rwanda.

 

Senegal: “The application of criminal law is an injustice against people living with HIV”

A magistrate laments the ‘unfair’ criminalisation of HIV transmission

Translated from French with Deepl.com. Scroll down for the original article.

The deputy director of human rights, Babacar Diouf, deems it unfair to criminalise the transmission of HIV-AIDS, except in cases of intentional transmission.

‘The application of criminal law is an injustice against people living with HIV, unless a person deliberately decides to infect another person’, said the magistrate.

He was hosting a conference on the theme of ‘Following the path of rights to eliminate AIDS in Senegal’, an event organised on Wednesday as part of the celebration of World AIDS Day by the National AIDS Council.

According to the deputy director of human rights at the Ministry of Justice, the right to health in Senegal is not subject to judicial review. ‘What’s not working is criminalisation. This is an obstacle to the fight against AIDS’, he maintained.

‘The criminalisation of HIV is detrimental to rights. It is unfair when it targets a person who cannot disclose his or her status’, he argued.

‘We need to be aware that proclaimed rights that are not effective are of no use’, he said, pointing out that “the law on AIDS is unknown to some judicial actors”.

‘The lack of information among the judiciary is a hindrance to the fight against AIDS. They have no information about certain health data’, he said.

With this in mind, Babacar Diouf called on the National AIDS Council to ‘equip the judiciary’ so that they can play a greater role in the fight against AIDS.

He believes it is imperative to combat stigmatisation and discrimination.

Samba Cor Sarr, Director of Cabinet at the Ministry of Health and Social Action, pointed out that the theme of World AIDS Day, ‘Following the path of rights to eliminate AIDS in Senegal’, revived the issue of human rights in the fight against HIV.

‘The path of the fight against AIDS is strewn with rights-related issues: the right to health, the right to access to care and treatment, the right to a favourable environment, the right to a fairer, more equitable world’, listed the representative of the Minister of Health.

He also spoke of ‘the right to life, to a positive life for all those directly or indirectly affected by HIV’.

He also emphasised that Senegal, like other countries, still faces ‘significant challenges in the fight against HIV/AIDS’, including strengthening the fight against HIV at community level.

These challenges include stepping up the fight against HIV at community level. These challenges include stepping up care for children living with HIV, engaging young people and combating stigma and discrimination. Samba Cor Sarr also cited the fight against inequalities in access to care and the strengthening of support mechanisms.

In the Senegalese context, he added, this year’s theme ‘takes on its full meaning insofar as it enables a more specific and tailored response to the needs of communities affected by HIV/AIDS in order to reduce stigma and discrimination’.

Un magistrat déplore la pénalisation de la transmission du Sida, « une injustice »

Dakar, 12 déc (APS) – Le directeur adjoint des droits humains, Babacar Diouf, juge injuste la pénalisation de la transmission du VIH Sida, sauf dans les cas de contamination intentionnelle.

« L’application du droit pénal est une injustice contre les personnes vivant avec le VIH, sauf si une personne décide délibérément de contaminer une autre personne », a déclaré le magistrat.

Il animait une conférence sur le thème « Suivre le chemin des droits pour l’élimination du Sida au Sénégal », une activité organisée mercredi dans le cadre de la célébration de la Journée mondiale de lutte contre le Sida par le Conseil national de lutte contre le Sida.

Selon le directeur adjoint des droits humains au ministère de la Justice, le droit de la santé n’est pas judiciarisé au Sénégal. « Ce qui ne va pas, c’est la pénalisation. Il s’agit d’un obstacle à la lutte contre le Sida », a-t-il soutenu.

« La pénalisation du VIH nuit au droit. Elle est injuste lorsqu’elle vise une personne qui ne peut pas dévoiler son statut », a-t-il argumenté.

« Nous devons savoir que des droits proclamés qui ne sont pas effectifs n’ont pas d’utilité », a-t-il dit, en faisant observer que « la loi sur le Sida est inconnue de certains acteurs judiciaires ».

« Le manque d’information des acteurs judiciaires est un frein à la lutte. Les acteurs n’ont pas d’information sur certaines données sanitaires », a-t-il indiqué.

Dans ce sens, Babacar Diouf invite le Conseil national de lutte contre le Sida à « outiller les acteurs judiciaires », afin qu’ils puissent mieux participer à la lutte contre le Sida.

Il juge impératif de lutter contre la stigmatisation et la discrimination.

Samba Cor Sarr, directeur de cabinet du ministère de la Santé et de l’Action sociale, a pour sa part relevé que le thème consacré à la Journée mondiale de lutte contre le Sida, à savoir « Suivre le chemin des droits pour l’élimination du Sida au Sénégal », fait renaitre la question des droits humains dans la lutte contre le VIH.

« Le chemin de la lutte contre le Sida est parsemé de problématiques liées aux droits : droit à la santé, droit à l’accès aux soins et aux traitements, droit à un environnement favorable, droit à un monde plus juste, plus équitable », a énuméré le représentant du ministre de la Santé.

Il a également évoqué « le droit à la vie, à une vie positive pour toutes les personnes touchées directement ou indirectement par le VIH ».

Il a par ailleurs souligné que le Sénégal, à l’instar des autres pays, demeure « confronté à des défis significatifs dans la lutte contre le VIH/Sida », parmi lesquels le renforcement de la lutte contre le VIH au niveau communautaire.

Le renforcement de la prise en charge des enfants vivant avec le VIH fait partie de ces défis, de même que l’engagement de la jeunesse, la lutte contre la stigmatisation et la discrimination. Samba Cor Sarr a également cité la lutte contre les inégalités en matière d’accès aux soins et le renforcement des mécanismes de soutien.

Dans le contexte sénégalais, ajoute-t-il, le thème retenu cette année « prend tout son sens dans la mesure où il permet une réponse plus spécifique et plus adaptée aux besoins des communautés touchées par le VIH/Sida afin de réduire la stigmatisation et la discrimination »

Death penalty for unintentional HIV transmission via same-sex sex struck down by Uganda’s Constitutional Court

The recent (April 3rd) ruling by Uganda’s Constitutional Court declaring that the Anti Homosexuality Act of 2023 complies with the Constitution of Uganda – except in only four aspects – was quite rightly roundly condemned by Amnesty International, the Global Fund, Human Rights Watch, International AIDS Society, and UNAIDS, as well as the US Department of State, amongst many others.

Rather than strike down every section of this heinous, draconian anti-gay law, the Court was unanimous in ruling that most of its dangerous, overly broad, and problematic provisions remain in place. 

However, in its 200+ page ruling, the Court did find that Sections 3(2)(c), 9, 11(2d) and 14 did not “pass constitutional muster” and were struck down.

Sections 9 and 11(2d) refer to landlords allowing homosexuality to take place on their premises, and section 14 refers to a “duty to report acts of homosexuality” to the police.

But section 3(2)(c) was one of the most heinous of all of the Act’s horrendous provisions, proscribing the death penalty for someone living with HIV who engaged in same-sex sex and where HIV is allegedly passed on.

  1. Aggravated homosexuality (1) A person who commits the offence of homosexuality in any of the circumstances specified in subsection (2) commits the offence of aggravated homosexuality and is liable, on conviction, to suffer death. (2) (c) the person against whom the offence is committed contracts a terminal illness as a result of the sexual act.

Read the full text of the law here

Both the Court, several petitioners, and UNAIDS – who provided an amicus brief to the Court – correctly interpreted this section as criminalising unintentional HIV transmission when two people of the same sex had sex.

In paragraphs 510-512, the Court referred to several key documents – including the 2011 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and UNAIDS 2013 Guidance Note, Ending overly broad criminalisation of HIV non-disclosure, exposure and transmission: Critical scientific, medical and legal considerations – and were persuaded that the section did not provide for “the element of criminal intent or mens rea, which is a vital component of the concept of crime.”

The Constitutional Court ruling went on to say:

“This indeed is the approach that was adopted in section 43 of the HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, 2015, which criminalizes the intentional transmission of HIV as follows: ‘a person who wilfully and intentionally transmits HIV to another person commits an offence.’

“Finding no justification for the criminalization of the unintentional transmission of HIV under section 3(2)(c) of the Anti-Homosexuality Act we take the view that it compounds the susceptibility of persons that are HIV+ to mental health issues and thus impedes their right to enjoy the highest attainable standard of mental health, with potential ramifications to their physical health as well. This is a violation of the right to health as envisaged under Article 12(1) of the ICESCR and is inconsistent with Articles 45 and 287 of the Uganda Constitution.”

 

However, people living with HIV are already over-criminalised in Uganda by various sections of the HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act, as summarised in our Global HIV Criminalisation Database.

What is termed as “wilful and intentional” transmission of HIV is punishable by a fine and/or up to ten years’ imprisonment. Section 43 provides a defence if the accused’s partner was aware of, and accepted, the risk of transmission, or transmission occurred during sexual intercourse and protective measures were used. Attempted transmission is punishable by a fine and/or up to five years’ imprisonment. The scope of section 41 is undefined, but cases demonstrate that the law criminalises perceived HIV ‘exposure’ broadly.

Both Section 41 and 43 are known to have been used in a broad range of circumstances, including prosecution of a man for ‘defilement’ (2013), prosecution of a teacher for alleged transmission to his student (2013), the alleged injection of a toddler/needle stick injury (2014), alleged transmission by a woman to a number of young men (2014), alleged breastfeeding of an employer’s child (2018), the arrest, conviction and acquittal of a nurse wrongfully convicted of injecting a baby with HIV-infected blood (2018), and the alleged defilement of a boy by a woman (2019). An earlier prosecution from 2008 involved a man charged with alleged transmission. In the most recent case in 2023, a woman living with HIV pled guilty to charges under section 43 after injecting her 5-year-old son with her blood and was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. Cases have generally not used scientific evidence to prove allegations, with convictions at lower-level courts relying only on testimony.

Nevertheless, the recognition of key legal and rights-based arguments against punishing unintentional HIV transmission with the death penalty(!) as part of an otherwise anti-rights, morality-based ruling should be seen as a small but welcome victory. Although this might be seen as similar to the 2022 Lesotho High Court decision on the unconstitutionality of the death penalty in the context of HIV transmission following rape, the difference of course is that that rape is an act of violence that should be criminalised regardless of any other circumstances, whereas consensual sex between two men or two women should never, ever be a crime.