Russia: Medical documents showing negative HIV status and no drug addiction required for stays over 90 days

Migrants may be required to provide the Ministry of Internal Affairs with a certificate of the absence of HIV infection

Automated translation – For original article in Russian, please scroll down

MOSCOW, November 19. / TASS /. Labor migrants and foreign citizens who have arrived in Russia for a period of more than 90 days may be obliged to provide the Ministry of Internal Affairs with medical documents showing the absence of drug addiction and HIV infection from December 29. This follows from the draft order prepared by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, which was reviewed by TASS.

“To approve the procedure for submission by foreign citizens and stateless persons who arrived in the Russian Federation for purposes not related to the implementation of labor activities, for a period exceeding 90 calendar days, or for the purpose of labor activity, to the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation <…> documents confirming the passage of a medical examination for the presence or absence of the fact of their use of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances without a doctor’s prescription or new potentially dangerous psychoactive substances, infectious diseases that pose a danger to others, <…> and a disease caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV -infection) “, – the document says. At the same time, it is noted that “this order comes into force on December 29, 2021”.

As follows from the document, foreigners must submit medical documents to the Ministry of Internal Affairs within 30 days from the date of expiration of the previously issued medical documents confirming that they have passed a medical examination. In the event that a foreign citizen has not reached the age of 18 or is recognized by a court as incompetent, documents can be submitted by one of his parents, guardians or trustees.

“Medical documents can be submitted at the place of residence of a foreign citizen on paper – directly to the migration department of the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, or to an enterprise or an authorized organization, or in the form of an electronic document signed with an enhanced qualified electronic signature, using the federal state information the system “A single portal of state and municipal services (functions)” to the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, “the draft order says.

In the event that the documents are drawn up in a foreign language, then they must be translated into Russian, the correctness of which must be notarized. Upon admission, the authorized person must check the full compliance of the documents with the established standards, and then issue a certificate of receipt. At the same time, if a migrant submits medical documents in electronic form, then an electronic message is sent to him about their acceptance no later than the working day following the day they were received. Subsequently, information about the receipt of medical documents is entered into the information system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, intended for the provision of public services, within three working days from the date of their receipt.


Мигрантов могут обязать предоставлять в МВД справки об отсутствии ВИЧ-инфекции

Приказ может вступить в силу 29 декабря
МОСКВА, 19 ноября. /ТАСС/. Трудовых мигрантов и иностранных граждан, прибывших в Россию на срок более 90 дней, могут обязать с 29 декабря предоставлять в МВД медицинские документы об отсутствии у них наркозависимости и ВИЧ-инфекции. Это следует из подготовленного МВД РФ проекта приказа, с которым ознакомился ТАСС.

“Утвердить порядок представления иностранными гражданами и лицами без гражданства, прибывшими в РФ в целях, не связанных с осуществлением трудовой деятельности, на срок, превышающий 90 календарных дней, либо в целях осуществления трудовой деятельности, в территориальный орган МВД РФ <…> медицинских документов, подтверждающих прохождение медицинского освидетельствования на наличие или отсутствие факта употребления ими наркотических средств или психотропных веществ без назначения врача либо новых потенциально опасных психоактивных веществ, инфекционных заболеваний, представляющих опасность для окружающих, <…> и заболевания, вызываемого вирусом иммунодефицита человека (ВИЧ-инфекции)”, – говорится в документе. При этом отмечается, что “настоящий приказ вступает в силу с 29 декабря 2021 года”.

Как следует из документа, представить медицинские документы в МВД иностранцы должны в течение 30 дней со дня истечения срока действия ранее выданных медицинских документов, подтверждающих прохождение ими медицинского освидетельствования. В случае, если иностранный гражданин не достиг 18 лет или признан судом недееспособным, документы может представить один из его родителей, опекунов или попечителей.

“Медицинские документы могут быть представлены по месту пребывания иностранного гражданина на бумажном носителе – непосредственно в подразделение по вопросам миграции территориального органа МВД России, либо в предприятие или уполномоченную организацию, либо в форме электронного документа, подписанного усиленной квалифицированной электронной подписью, с использованием федеральной государственной информационной системы “Единый портал государственных и муниципальных услуг (функций)” в территориальный орган МВД России”, – отмечается в проекте приказа.

В том случае, если документы составлены на иностранном языке, то они подлежат переводу на русский язык, верность которого должна быть нотариально засвидетельствована. Уполномоченное лицо при приеме должно проверить полное соответствии документов установленным нормам, после чего выдать справку об их получении. При этом, если мигрант подает медицинские документы в электронном виде, то ему направляется электронное сообщение об их приеме не позднее рабочего дня, следующего за днем их получения. В последующем сведения о получении медицинских документов вносятся в информационную систему МВД России, предназначенную для предоставления государственных услуг, в течение трех рабочих дней с даты их получения.

Mexico: Two deputies present a bill in Mexico City to reform the law around HIV exposure and transmission

“They go against penalties for HIV transmission “

The deputies Ana Francis López and Temístocles Villanueva, from Morena, presented an initiative to eliminate the penalties of three months to 10 years in prison stipulated in the Penal Code against those who transmit the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) to another person, even when having knowledge of their diagnosis.

Although the law is not explicit in mentioning HIV as a transmission that warrants imprisonment, it has been used to initiate proceedings against people living with the virus.

As was the case of a man who was arrested by the Attorney General’s Office on June 3, for incurring “danger of contagion.”

The deputies accuse the law to be ambiguous. They point out that the term “incurable diseases” is imprecise, and gives rise to the jurisdictional authority deciding which are the diseases that are considered serious.

The initiative of López and Villanueva proposes to reform Article 76 in order to eliminate the penalties for danger of contagion and to repeal Article 159 of the Penal Code of Mexico City; it was turned over to the Commissions for the Procurement and Administration of Justice for analysis.

Civil organisations have fought for this repeal, something recommended by UNAIDS, since they state that it criminalises those living with HIV, .

“The Joint United Nations Program on HIV and AIDS has insisted that countries must carry out reforms and make commitments in the framework of the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development, in order to eliminate discriminatory laws,” they quote in the proposal.


Van contra penas por transmisión de VIH

Los diputados Ana Francis López y Temístocles Villanueva, de Morena, presentaron una iniciativa para eliminar las penas de tres meses a 10 años de prisión contempladas en el Código Penal en contra de quienes transmitan el Virus de Inmunodeficiencia Humana (VIH) a otra persona, aun teniendo conocimiento de su diagnóstico.

Aunque la ley no es explícita al mencionar al VIH como una transmisión que amerite prisión, se ha utilizado para iniciar procedimientos contras personas que viven con el virus.

Como lo fue el caso de un hombre que fue detenido por la Fiscalía General de Justicia el 3 de junio pasado, por incurrir en “peligro de contagio”.

Los diputados acusan que la ley es ambigua, pues señalan que el término “enfermedades incurables” es impreciso, lo que da pie a que la autoridad jurisdiccional decida cuales son las enfermedades que se consideran graves.

La iniciativa de López y Villanueva propone reformar el Artículo 76 para eliminar las penas por peligro de contagio y derogar el Artículo 159 del Código Penal de la Ciudad de México; fue turnada a las comisiones de Procuración y Administración de Justicia para su análisis.

Organizaciones civiles han pugnado por esta derogación, ya que acusan que criminaliza a quienes viven con VIH, algo que ONUSIDA ha recomendado.

“El Programa Conjunto de las Naciones Unidas para el VIH y el SIDA ha insistido en que los países deben realizar reformas y adquirir compromisos en el marco de la Agenda 2030 para el desarrollo sostenible, con el fin de eliminar las leyes discriminatorias”, citan en la propuesta.

UPDATE: Speakers now confirmed for #BeyondBlame2021!

REGISTER HERE

Beyond Blame, our flagship meeting for activists, human rights defenders, criminal legal system and public health system actors, healthcare professionals, researchers, and anyone else working to end HIV criminalisation, is returning for a special eve-of-World AIDS Day edition.

Following the success of last year’s Beyond Blame @ HIV2020, which was reimagined as a two-hour web show, the HIV JUSTICE WORLDWIDE coalition is delighted to announce that Beyond Blame: Challenging Criminalisation for HIV JUSTICE WORLDWIDE will take place on Tuesday, November 30, 2021, from 6-8 PM Central European Time. Check this link to find the event in your local time.

REGISTER HERE

Beyond Blame is a unique opportunity to learn why HIV criminalisation matters, as well as hear about the wide range of initiatives and strategies that have been used by activists, lawyers, networks, and organisations around the world to work towards ending the inappropriate use of criminal law to regulate and punish people living with HIV.

We will be highlighting some of the successes and challenges of the global movement to end HIV criminalisation over the past year, including work on ending the criminalisation of women living with HIV for breastfeeding, exploring whether scientific advances, such as the prevention benefit of treatment (U=U) and Molecular HIV Surveillance, help or hinder our movement and much, much more.

Beyond Blame will take place in English, with interpretation available in French, Russian and Spanish.

Follow the conversation on Twitter via #BeyondBlame2021 #HIVJustice

REGISTER HERE

Kyrgyzstan: CEDAW recommends the decriminalisation of HIV transmission through consensual sex

Concluding observations from the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on the fifth periodic report of Kyrgyzstan

43.       The Committee welcomes the decision of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of 27 January 2021 to declare unconstitutional the provisions precluding persons living with HIV/AIDS from adoption, guardianship and foster parenting. However, the Committee is concerned about the criminalisation of HIV/AIDS transmission through consensual sexual relations between adults, impediments to access to healthcare, discriminatory terminology, reported isolation from children and barriers to access childcare facilities for women living with HIV/AIDS.

44.       The Committee recommends that the State party:

(a)        Decriminalise the transmission of HIV/AIDS (article 149 of the Criminal Code) through consensual sexual relations between adults;

(b)        Ensure access to healthcare, including confidential testing, antiretroviral treatment, psychological support and the confidentiality of information regarding women’s HIV status, and impose deterrent penalties for the disclosure of such status;

(c)        Eliminate repressive elements of epidemiological investigation and review the wording of HIV infection codes;

(d)        Ensure that women living with HIV/AIDS are not isolated from their children based on their HIV status and have adequate access to childcare facilities free from stigmatization; and

(e)    Prohibit the practice of employers requiring HIV certificates for accessing and keeping employment.

 

In September 2021 EWNA jointly with Women’s Network of Key Communities submitted the alternative report with particular focus on HIV criminalisation in Kyrgyzstan

Mexico: “Danger of contagion”, an offence under article 159 of the Penal Code of Mexico Federal District, declared unconstitutional

Judge grants protection to person accused of HIV infection

Automatic translation – For original text in Spanish, please scroll down.

Judge declares the crime indicated in the penal code of Mexico City as unconstitutional for violating funda­mental rights.

The firm Ramírez, Penilla, Rubio, Cuadra, Abogados, S.C. reported that on October 4 they were notified of the sentence issued by the titular Judge of the Sixteenth District Court of Amparo in Criminal Matters of Mexico City in the protection trial filed in favor of Juan N, who was linked to the process in June this year for the crime of danger of contagion.

They indicated that the sentence establishes, among other things, the unconstitutionality of the crime of danger of contagion established in article 159 of the Penal Code for the Federal District because the con­tested norm does not approve the constitutional and conventional standards of suitability and propor­tionality as it violates of the first article of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States and of the 26 of the American Convention of Human Rights.

“We congratulate ourselves for the issuance of this jurisdictional decision that reflects the recognition of human rights in the broadest spectrum and we urge that this important prece­dent be translated into the elimination of all forms of discrimination and criminalization of the health condition of women. people, “they celebrated.

Finally, the lawyer Olivia Rubio ratified the commitment of her signature in obtaining justice, especially for those who belong to priority attention groups.


Jueza concede amparo a persona acusada de contagio de VIH

Declara inconstitucional delito señalado en el código penal de la ciudad de México por contra­venir dere­chos fundamentales.

El despacho Ramírez, Penilla, Rubio, Cuadra, Abogados, S.C. informó que el 4 de octubre fueron notifica­dos de la sentencia emitida por la Jueza titular del Juzgado Decimosexto de Distrito de Amparo en Materia Penal de la Ciudad de México en el juicio de amparo interpuesto a favor de Juan N, quien fue vinculado a proceso en junio de este año por el delito de peligro de contagio.

Señalaron que la sentencia establece, entre otras cosas, la inconstitucionalidad del delito de pe­ligro de contagio establecido en el artículo 159 del Código Penal para el Distrito Federal debido a que la norma combatida no aprueba los estándares constitucionales y convencionales de ido­neidad y proporcionalidad al ser violatoria del artículo primero de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos y del 26 de la Convención Americana de los Derechos Humanos.

“Nos congratulamos por la emisión de esta decisión jurisdiccional que es reflejo del reconoci­miento de los derechos humanos en el espectro más amplio e instamos para que este impor­tante precedente se traduzca en la eliminación de toda forma de discriminación y criminaliza­ción de la condición de salud de las personas”, celebraron.

Finalmente, la abogada Olivia Rubio ratificó el compromiso de su firma en la obtención de justi­cia, espe­cialmente para quienes pertenecen a grupos de atención prioritaria.

Report: End HIV criminalisation to address LGBT+ inequities

A new report published by the Global Equality Caucus examines what elected officials can do to ensure LGBT+ people receive equitable access to HIV healthcare.

The report titled Breaking barriers in HIV: Action for legislators to address LGBT+ inequities, includes ten recommendations for legislators and others to take forward, including repealing or modernising outdated HIV criminalisation laws, and doing more to safeguard health data privacy.

The report notes that HIV criminalisation laws are “out of step with modern scientific understanding and perpetuate outdated HIV stigmas.” Removing such laws would help to tackle prejudice and refocus HIV as a public health crisis.

Also relevant to our ongoing work on molecular HIV surveillance, the report further recommends that where data is collected, anonymity should always be assured, and “this applies to HIV testing, immigration status, or whatever other circumstances that may place LGBT+ people in danger should their health data be shared with other government authorities.”

Parliamentarians have a responsibility to ensure government departments respect the privacy of citizens and that health data is not being shared with agencies that could present additional barriers to the lives of LGBT+ people, such as immigration authorities or justice departments.

US: New Jersey’s Acting Attorney General issues science-informed prosecutorial guidance for application of HIV criminalisation law

New Guidance on Prosecuting HIV Crimes in New Jersey

In stressing U=U, New Jersey’s acting attorney general wants to ensure that no one living with HIV is charged unjustly.

New Jersey’s Acting Attorney General Andrew Bruck issued new guidance regarding enforcement of a 24-year-old law that criminalizes certain activities by people living with HIV, according to a press release from Bruck’s office.

Specifically, the guidance directs prosecutors to take into account three factors when deciding whether to charge someone under the state’s HIV crime law. The guidance is based on modern scientific knowledge about how HIV is and isn’t contracted—notably that people who maintain an undetectable viral load do no transmit HIV via sex, a fact known as Undetectable Equals Untransmittable, or U=U. What’s more, the guidance follows the lead of several professional organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division.

The state law in question is NJSA 2C:34-5(b). Enacted in 1997, the law “made it a third-degree crime for an individual living with HIV to engage in an ‘act of sexual penetration’ without the informed consent of their partner,” according to the two-page guidance, which adds that the disease was then thought to be a death sentence.

Thanks to modern treatment, HIV mortality and transmission risk have been greatly reduced. However, the guidance continues, stigma remains a public health challenge and crime laws discourage people from getting tested and accessing treatment.

The guidance then states:

Of course, NJSA 2C:34-5(b) remains on the books, and it is the responsibility of the legislature—not prosecutors—to decide whether and how the law should be modified. And while relatively few individuals are charged with violating NJSA 2C:34-5(b), it is helpful to provide statewide guidance to ensure that its enforcement does not undermine current public-health strategies.

As always, prosecutors retain significant discretion in deciding whether and under what circumstances to charge individuals with certain criminal offenses. In deciding whether to charge a violation of NJSA 2C:34-5(b), prosecutors should consider the following factors:

• Whether the individual forced or coerced their partner to engage in sexual activity;

• Whether the individual engaged in sexual activity for the purpose of transmitting HIV to their partner; and/or

• Whether the individual was adhering to a medically appropriate HIV treatment plan at the time of the sexual activity.

It is virtually impossible to imagine a scenario where it would be appropriate for a prosecutor to charge an individual with NJSA 2C:34-5(b) when that person’s HIV viral load was undetectable at the time of the sexual activity and no aggravating factors existed. Prosecutors who are considering criminal charges in such circumstances must consult with the Director of the Division of Criminal Justice before proceeding.

“This guidance is designed to ensure that people are not prosecuted unjustly and that we do not undermine public health strategies aimed at encouraging testing, treatment and prevention,” the acting attorney general said in the press release.

“The guidance that we are providing to prosecutors makes clear that this state law should be enforced only when specific aggravating factors are present,” added director Lyndsay Ruotolo of the Division of Criminal Justice. “Our goal is to ensure that if anyone living with HIV is criminally charged under this statute, it is done justly and consistently.”

“We recognize that 40 years after the first…reported AIDS case in this country, medical advancements have dramatically changed outcomes for individuals living with HIV. However, outdated laws such as this have remained on the books and are highly discriminatory, have not proven to reduce HIV transmission and discourage individuals from learning their HIV status,” said Hudson County prosecutor Esther Suarez, president of the County Prosecutors Association of New Jersey. “Acting Attorney General Bruck’s guidance issued today will ensure that individuals living with HIV in New Jersey are not unjustly stigmatized or prosecuted and will reinforce public health protocols that are critical to sustaining the progress made in treatment of this disease.”

 

US: Pennsylvania House Democratic Policy Committee hears testimonies against HIV criminalisation laws

‘HIV is not a crime’: Pennsylvania House panel tackles outdated laws targeting those living with the virus

By: Frank Pizzoli

‘HIV is not a crime but there are outdated laws that make it a crime in Pennsylvania. We cannot have people losing lives and livelihoods because of this,’ Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta said.

About 20 people gathered Wednesday in the East Wing of the State Capitol to unveil the “Living a Positive Life” mural commissioned by the Family Health Council as part of its Take Control of HIV campaign.

“We are here today to broadcast loud and clear that HIV is no longer a death sentence,” Patricia Fonzi, the CEO of the Family Health Council of Central Pennsylvania said.

The mural is full of colorful graphics and messaging regarding the importance of open communication about HIV. On display at the capitol for the month of October, the goal of the mural is to empowers individuals to thrive no matter their HIV status.

The mural was created by well-known Harrisburg-based artist Stephen Michael Haas, a multi-disciplined artist inspired by the likes of late 90s cartoons and Super Mario’s squirrels.

In 2018, there were 36,144 people living with HIV in Pennsylvania. In 2018, 1,023 people were newly diagnosed with HIV, according to aidsvu.org.

“Whether infected long-term or a more recently, there is hope like never before,” Fonzi told the Capital-Star. Current medications can control HIV to the point where the virus is ‘undetectable’ on a lab test.

Furthering the push by HIV service organizations is the scientifically researched concept of Undetectable = Untransmittable or U=U for shorthand. More than 750 organizations worldwide, according to aidsmap.com, and including the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the Centers of Disease Control, and the World Health Organization “agree that people with HIV whose viral load is stably suppressed cannot sexually transmit the virus.”

In non-professional terms, U=U means “if a person with HIV is on HIV meds (antiretroviral therapy, or ART) with a consistently undetectable HIV viral load, the virus cannot be transmitted to a sex partner,” according to the US Dept. of Veteran’s Affairs.

Change outdated laws? 

Although not coordinated with the mural’s unveiling, transmitting HIV to a sexual partner formed the basis of a hearing held the same morning before the House Democratic Policy Committee under the direction of Philadelphia Democratic Reps. Mary Isaacson and Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta.

“Pennsylvania has laws on the books that criminalize or control behaviors through HIV-specific statues and regulations.” Kenyatta said in a statement.“HIV is not a crime but there are outdated laws that make it a crime in Pennsylvania. We cannot have people losing lives and livelihoods because of this.”

The policy committee heard from Cumberland County resident Julie Graham, who described the impact of these laws on her life after she was charged with four crimes, including two felonies, based on allegations by a man she had dated who claimed she didn’t disclose her HIV status. Due to these allegations, she faced personal and professional consequences that forever impacted the trajectory of her life.

“I support and applaud your courage and advocacy to testify here today,” Rep. Isaacson expressed to Graham. “Being HIV positive is not a crime and we must do better in supporting those in Pennsylvania who are living with HIV.”

House Democratic Policy Committee Chairman Rep. Ryan Bizzarro, D-Erie, was also in attendance adding, “HIV decriminalization is important to the entire Democratic Caucus and I am grateful to the testifiers who came today to speak on this important topic.”

Other testifiers during the hearing include Adrian Shanker, executive director, Bradbury-Sullivan LGBT Community Center, Steven Bryson, SERO Legal Fellow, AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania, and Michelle Troxell, Pennsylvania Co-Chair, Positive Women’s Network USA. They each shared data that show the impact of these laws on the lives of Pennsylvanians and support changes to the laws.

Michelle Troxell, representing the Positive Women’s Network and a nurse, told the committee she has lived with HIV for 32 years. Her testimony noted that “while I have seen many advances in the way we medically treat people living with HIV, I have barely seen any advances in the way we treat people living with HIV.” See meant the laws that govern how HIV is handled within the legal system.

“HIV criminalization fuels stigma. Stigma, fear, criminalization, and discrimination based on my HIV status impacts many decisions in my life, such as starting a new job, changing employers, getting health insurance, trying to get life insurance, starting a relationship, or ending a relationship.” She pointed out that “HIV criminalization is the criminalization of behaviors that would not be a criminal act for anyone not living with HIV – HIV criminalization laws reduce people, like me, to our viral status. It is dehumanizing and disempowering.”

Also testifying was Steven R. Bryson, a Sero Project Fellow and staff attorney with the AIDS Law Project of PA. He explained what is confusing to many people about the state’s HIV laws.

“Pennsylvania does not have HIV-specific criminal laws mandating disclosure of one’s HIV positive status prior to engaging in sexual contact. Nor does it specifically outlaw the perceived, potential or actual HIV exposure or transmission,” Bryson’s submitted testimony noted. Instead, his testimony clarifies, “Pennsylvania uses generally applicable criminal laws to prosecute people with HIV even when the act in question has little or no risk of transmitting HIV.”

The hearing was closed with comments from Rep. Kenyatta who said: “Here in Pennsylvania, we can and should do better than this. So many other states have updated their laws and we must work to get these laws off our books.”

Testimony is available at www.pahouse.com/policy.

Mural campaign statewide 

The statewide Take Control of HIV campaign is a collaboration of five organizations: AIDSNET (Mideast), Family Health Council of Central (South Central), North Central District AIDS Coalition (North Central), Northwest Alliance-Clarion University (Northwest), and United Way of Wyoming Valley (North East). Collectively, the sponsoring entities provide a range of vital services and care for thousands of women and children and adolescents each year, which include HIV-AIDS support services.

The mural is full of colorful graphics and messaging regarding the importance of open communication about HIV. On display at the capitol for the month of October, the goal of the mural is to empowers individuals to thrive no matter their HIV status. The mural was created by well-known Harrisburg-based artist Stephen Michael Haas, a multi-disciplined artist inspired by the likes of late 90s cartoons and Super Mario’s squirrels.

Lead organizer Family Health Council of Central PA, Inc. works within a 24-county region with hospitals, federally funded community health centers, freestanding clinics, direct service agencies, WIC centers, HIV/AIDS service organizations, another community-based organizations to provide services to thousands who might otherwise go without needed care.

To learn more, visit www.TakecontrolHIV.com

US: Supreme Court agrees that sex offender law struck down by Louisiana Supreme Court is unconstitutional

Supreme Court Declines To Hear Louisiana’s Defense of a Law That Stamped ‘SEX OFFENDER’ on Driver’s Licenses

The policy imposed an additional form of ritual humiliation on a reviled category of people without any plausible public-safety justification.

The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to hear Louisiana’s appeal of a decision against its 2006 law requiring that people on the state’s sex offender registry carry IDs or driver’s licenses that say “SEX OFFENDER” in orange capital letters. A year ago, the Louisiana Supreme Court concluded that the requirement amounted to compelled speech and could not be justified by the state’s legitimate interest in protecting public safety. In addition to raising First Amendment issues, Louisiana’s now-moribund law illustrates the longstanding tendency to impose additional punishment on people convicted of sex offenses in the guise of regulation.

The registries themselves, which require sex offenders to regularly report their addresses to local law enforcement agencies so that information can be made publicly available in online databases that also include their names, photographs, and physical descriptions, are primarily punitive, exposing registrants to ostracism, harassment, and violence while impeding their rehabilitation by making it difficult to find employment and housing. There is little evidence that the sort of public notification practiced by every state delivers benefits that outweigh those costs. Louisiana’s experiment in ritual humiliation, which branded registrants with orange letters they had to display in every transaction that required producing a government-issued ID, compounded those costs without offering any plausible benefits.

One problem with sex offender registries is that they cover a wide range of crimes, including many that do not involve violence, force, or physical contact. While people tend to imagine rapists or child molesters when they hear the term sex offender, the reality can be quite different, in ways that are important in assessing the danger that a person might pose to the general public or to people in particular age groups.

In Louisiana, for example, mandatory registration applies not only to crimes like rape and sexual assault but also to nonviolent offenses, such as voyeurism, possession of child pornography, consensual sex between adults who are closely related, sex between high school teachers and students (even when the student has reached the age of consent), and employment of a minor in “any practice, exhibition, or place, dangerous or injurious to the life, limbs, health, or morals of the minor.” Robert Suttle, who posted the picture of his driver’s license shown above, was forced to register because he was convicted of intentionally exposing someone to HIV, which resulted in a six-month prison sentence. After a bad breakup, he says, his former partner told the police he had not been informed of Suttle’s HIV status.

The second line of each record in the state’s registry shows the offender’s “tier,” which corresponds to various crimes classified by severity, ranging from Tier 1 (least serious, requiring registration for 15 years) to Tier 3 (most serious, requiring lifetime registration). Further down in the record, you can see the statute under which the registrant was convicted (e.g., “carnal knowledge of a juvenile”), which still omits potentially important details.

The driver’s license warning required by Louisiana’s law did not provide even that much information, meaning that anyone who saw it was invited to assume the worst. Tazin Hill, the man who challenged the law, completed his prison sentence in 2013. He was convicted of having sex with a 14-year-old when he was 32, which placed him in Tier 1. But anyone who saw his license had no way of knowing the nature or severity of his offense. Rebelling at this government-imposed badge of shame, Hill excised the “SEX OFFENDER” label from his license and covered the gap with clear tape, which resulted in the criminal charges that gave rise to this case.

Another problem with sex offender registries is the mistaken assumption that people who fall into this broad category are more likely to commit additional crimes than, say, robbers, burglars, or arsonists. When it upheld mandatory “treatment” of sex offenders in prison, for example, the Supreme Court relied on a highly dubious recidivism estimate that was repudiated by its original source but has nevertheless been cited repeatedly by lower courts. The “SEX OFFENDER” stamp on Louisiana driver’s licenses, even more than the registry, promoted such erroneous fears by implying that the bearer posed an ongoing threat, no matter the details of his crime, how long ago it occurred, or how he had behaved since he completed his sentence.

The empirically unjustified belief that sex offenders are highly prone to recidivism is especially inaccurate and damaging when applied to people convicted as minors, who are included in Louisiana’s registry and therefore had to carry “SEX OFFENDER” IDs or driver’s licenses. Judy Mantin, who this year testified before a state legislative committee that was considering revisions to Louisiana’s law in light of the state Supreme Court’s ruling, said her son “made a mistake” when he was 14 but today is “a very productive citizen.” She argued that “our children deserve a second chance in life.”

Legislators ostensibly have made the same judgment regarding adults convicted of sex offenses, who have notionally paid their debt to society once they complete their criminal sentences. Yet legislators imply otherwise by imposing additional burdens on those people for decades after their official punishment. In this case, any interaction involving a driver’s license—e.g., with cashiers, hotel clerks, bank tellers, employers, landlords, election officials, or airport security screeners—became a new invitation to close-range fear and loathing.

What was the justification for this requirement, which added to the burdens imposed by registration, public notification, and residence restrictions? The state argued that the “SEX OFFENDER” label facilitated law enforcement by alerting police officers to a person’s status. But police already could readily check that by consulting the state’s database. And as the Louisiana Supreme Court noted, the state could have eliminated even that slight inconvenience with a more discreet label: “A symbol, code, or a letter designation would inform law enforcement that they are dealing with a sex offender and thereby reduce the unnecessary disclosure to others during everyday tasks.”

Such a solution would not be adequate, the state argued in its petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, because “the Louisiana Legislature concluded that the public, and not merely law enforcement, needs to know of a sex offender’s status under limited circumstances.” Such as?

“A property manager needs to know a sex offender’s status when leasing an apartment—or the manager might incur liability if a tenant is raped on the premises,” the petition said. “A church or Red Cross facility may need to know a person’s status as a sex offender when providing shelter from a storm. People trick or-treating on Halloween may need a quick way to verify that their children are safe from predators.”

During a lower-court hearing, one of the state’s lawyers offered another example:

If I’m deciding who I want to be my babysitter and I know that I don’t want a sex offender to babysit my children, I say, “OK. I’d like to see your ID before I allow you to babysit my children.” And, “Oh, it says ‘sex offender.’ I’m not going to hire you.”

The Halloween scenario suggests the state’s desperation, not only because this particular hazard is an urban legend but also because it is difficult to imagine a situation in which parents would demand to see the driver’s licenses of neighbors handing out candy to trick-or-treaters. Even when the concerns are more reasonable, the public registry, for better or worse, already allowed anyone to look up an individual and see if he was listed; that was supposedly the whole purpose of creating a publicly accessible database in the first place.

“Louisiana’s branded-identification regime was an outlier in singling registrants out for public opprobrium,” Hill’s lawyers noted in their brief urging the Supreme Court not to consider the state’s appeal. “Just two other States require identification cards to display phrases like ‘SEX OFFENDER,’ while only six States have laws that require identification cards to include other types of sexual offense disclosure—typically a symbol or statute number recognizable only to law enforcement.”

Even as an outlier, Louisiana’s law suggests how ready politicians are to support practically any burden on sex offenders, whether or not it makes sense as a tool to promote public safety. Policies like these serve no useful purpose, but they do make life harder for a reviled category of people whose punishment never ends.

[Feature] It Takes More Than A Village to End HIV Criminalisation

The proverb says, “It takes a village to raise a child”. But what if a mother in the village is living with HIV, and some of the villagers stigmatise her? What if that stigma creates a situation where the mother living with HIV is unjustly criminalised because of her HIV status? Then it takes more than a village to get justice for that woman. It takes a global movement to end HIV criminalisation to sensitise and train lawyers and expert witnesses.  It takes national communities of women living with HIV to support that woman following her release, and to educate the community in which she lives about HIV.

Introduction

In 2016, a Malawi court convicted a woman living with HIV of “negligently and recklessly doing an act likely to spread the infection of any disease which is dangerous to life” under section 192 of the Malawi Penal Code. She had attended a village meeting with her baby which she breastfed as usual before passing the child to her grandmother. Another woman then asked her to hold her baby. It was alleged that this child began breastfeeding briefly before the woman realised what was happening. The child’s mother then reported the incident to the police. The woman was arrested and without legal advice or representation, pleaded guilty, was convicted, and sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment with hard labour.

The circumstances of the case are all the more shocking because women living with HIV are encouraged to breastfeed in Malawi (and in other countries with high HIV prevalence and settings in which diarrhoea, pneumonia and undernutrition are common causes of infant and child deaths) and because HIV-related prosecutions involving breastfeeding are exceedingly rare. Unfortunately, we have seen an increase in the number of such cases since 2016. HJN is working to address this in a number of ways because we believe there should never be prosecutions of women living with HIV for breastfeeding.

In addition, the accused woman was taking antiretroviral therapy. The chances of HIV transmission through even long-term breastfeeding are very low (which is why WHO guidelines recommend it when access to infant formula and clean water are limited) and the chances of transmission during the brief period the baby allegedly fed were infinitesimally small. In fact, the accused woman’s own child, who was routinely breastfed, has not acquired HIV, calling into question any suggestion that she intended to cause harm to the other woman’s child. Perversely, for a system that unjustly condemned her for risking harm to the other woman’s child, her own baby was imprisoned with her, without any arrangements for appropriate feeding and care, negating any notion that the legal system’s purpose was to protect children.

Following media reports of her initial conviction, numerous individuals and organisations – including HJN and our HIV JUSTICE WORLDWIDE partners, ARASA and SALC – became involved in the case, ultimately changing the outcome for the woman and her family, and laying the groundwork for further anti-HIV stigma advocacy and education in the region. Her story demonstrates the vital role that education, training, strong networks, and community play in the pursuit of HIV justice.

Living with HIV-related stigma

When interviewed at her home in 2019, the woman referred to as “EL” talked about her life:[1]

[1] The initials EL are used instead of her full name following a court order of anonymity to protect her privacy. The interview took place in 2019, during the village visit described later in this article.

“As kids, there were the two of us — me and my brother. My parents faced challenges raising us. Finding the basic necessities like soap and food was a tall order, let alone talking about going to school. It was difficult to get learning materials as well as proper clothes to wear at school. I worked hard in class but couldn’t get past Standard 5 at primary school. Eventually I dropped out, and my brother did the same, … My daily life was taken up doing house chores just like any other girl in the village, as well as helping my parents with farming. At 16, I got married.”

EL further described how she was diagnosed HIV-positive in 2015 after a de facto compulsory HIV test at an antenatal visit. She already had two children and was pregnant with her third. She had heard about HIV but did not know much about it. EL said that the healthcare workers provided a lot of assistance, giving her accurate information about HIV, including the importance of adhering to her antiretroviral treatment (ARVs).

EL and two of her children. Photo: Amos Gumulira/UNDP Malawi

EL said that she generally enjoyed life in her village, although at times she was subject to stigma and discrimination:

“When I went to fetch water at the community borehole, people would laugh at me, and whenever I wanted to participate in community work, you would find pockets of community members talking ill about me. Some people used to insult me, calling me names. But I persevered because my relatives, including the Village Headman himself, gave me support and always stood by my side.”

Members of EL’s family also faced discrimination. “Due to lack of information, a lot of people thought HIV was hereditary and because I was diagnosed HIV-positive, this meant that all my family members had HIV, and they were discriminated against,” EL said.

EL wonders if more could have been done to help her fight stigma. In particular, EL gained a lot of knowledge about HIV from the counselling she got when diagnosed, but perhaps she could have been better equipped with information to share with people in her community:

“A lot of people don’t know that if you adhere to ARVs, you reduce the risk of transmitting HIV to others. This information needs to be passed on to many people. There are also other issues to do with ARVs. A lot of people don’t have adequate information on the effects of ARVs and at the end of the day, they start pointing fingers at each other, giving people room to start speculating about issues to do with witchcraft.”

EL’s prosecution had repercussions for her whole village. One woman from the community explained:

“I was there and very close to where EL was sitting. Yes, she was carrying another woman’s child. This other woman had given the child to EL for safe keeping while she went to stand in a queue, but honestly speaking, I didn’t see EL breastfeed the child. I just heard some people who were sitting a distance from where we were sitting, as they started pointing accusing fingers at her.”

She said that things moved so fast that before they could think of anything to stop what she called “the rumour.” It had gotten out of hand and people started saying that EL had intentionally breastfed the child to transmit HIV.

After receiving a summons, EL voluntarily turned herself in at the police station. She was accompanied by the Village Headman (her grandfather) who wanted first-hand information about what crime she was alleged to have committed. That same day, police transferred EL to a larger town, where she was remanded for three days. At the age of 29, this was the first time that EL had ever left her village.

Days later, she appeared in court and the charge sheet was read out. EL recounted that she had not understood what was happening and could not make arguments because she had no legal representation. EL agreed with the summary of events as they were described, so she was found guilty and was imprisoned together with her youngest child.

She described life in prison as “hell”:

“After a week, my brother showed up to give me my ARVs. All this talk about a woman with HIV breastfeeding. I breastfed but I also found it tough to feed my baby while in prison because there was no provision of special food for babies. We were eating nandolo (pigeon peas) almost every day with Msima ya Mgaiwa (maize meal). And there was only one toilet for a cell of more than 50 people.”

After some time, relatives and other members of her community started visiting, giving her money she could use to buy soap and food for her baby. “When we heard from our Village Headman that she had been arrested, we were so devastated”, a woman from EL’s village explained. “We raised funds for some members to go and give her support only to learn that she had been transferred to one town, then another, but some of us did manage on several occasions to visit her and offer our support when she was in prison.”

Then, out of the blue, EL received a message that some people had come looking for her. She went to meet them: a lawyer, Wesley Mwafulirwa, and his paralegal. They explained why they were there and asked if she would like them to appeal on her behalf. She accepted enthusiastically. “I was excited but at the same time I was confused because I could not believe that I could be so lucky to have these people come to help me.”

Fighting the charges

Solicitor Wesley Mwafulirwa had volunteered to attend training to address legal barriers to prison health and human rights presented by the Southern African Litigation Centre (SALC). He travelled from Malawi to South Africa to attend the training which addressed useful regional and international mechanisms, and presented insights about legal practice and strategic litigation to support prison health and human rights, particularly for those facing heightened vulnerability to HIV and TB.

Wesley Mwafulirwa Photo: Amos Gumulira/UNDP Malawi

At the training, two lawyers spoke about their pro bono work. Wesley remembers one of them, Allan Maleche (Executive Director of KELIN), saying that each participant should take at least one case when they go back to their country. It was a turning point in Wesley’s career.

He had not been home long when he saw an article in the newspaper about an HIV-positive person convicted for trying to spread HIV. That person was EL.

Wesley, who lives in a small town in northern Malawi, drove for more than ten hours to get to the jail where EL was incarcerated. He explained his determination, saying “I was so fired up! I’d just come from SALC’s training … and I said, ‘I want to take up this case’.”

Wesley interviewed EL and offered to take her case pro bono. Wesley contacted SALC, who offered technical support. Their first step was to get an order for anonymity to protect EL’s identity and gain greater control over media reporting. Next, they faced an ethical question. They wanted to challenge the constitutionality of the law but that would take a long time. Because EL was in prison, they decided to undertake a criminal appeal instead. They applied for EL to be let out of custody on bail pending appeal. This is usually a difficult application to win, but they were successful and EL was released from prison.

In the appeal, the court was asked to consider whether the conviction could be justified, whether the penal provision was constitutional (arguing it was overly broad and vague), and whether the sentence was manifestly unjust. Wesley used his learnings from the SALC training to raise international principles and instruments relating to sentencing, which the court referenced and upheld. Michaela Clayton, then Executive Director of the AIDS and Rights Alliance for southern Africa (ARASA), and now a member of HJN’s Supervisory Board, provided expert testimony. Another expert witness, Dr Ruth Brand, identified through HJN’s global network, gave expert scientific evidence to show the risk of HIV transmission had been “infinitesimally small.”

The case was heard by Honourable Justice Zione Ntaba, who held that the proceedings in the trial court were irregular and “blatantly bias” against EL, compromising her right to a fair trial. Justice Ntaba found the charge sheet had been defective and therefore EL’s plea should not have been recorded as guilty. She noted the law must be sensitive to the accused’s knowledge or belief (or lack of) that HIV would be transmitted. Justice Ntaba decided the conviction could not be justified, acknowledging human rights principles against the overly broad criminalisation of HIV non-disclosure, exposure, or transmission. EL’s sentence was set aside. (The Constitutional challenge was referred to a full-member panel of the Constitutional Court although the case was not pursued.)

Notably, Justice Ntaba was a member of the African Regional Judges Forum to discuss HIV, TB and Human Rights (a process which is owned and planned by the judges and run with support from UNDP and funding from the Global Fund).

Fighting the stigma

Shortly after EL’s arrest, the Coalition of Women and Girls Living with HIV and AIDS in Malawi (COWLHA) and the Malawi branch of the International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS (ICW-Malawi) discussed the case at a roundtable meeting. At first, everyone was surprised and even laughed, questioning how she could have breastfed someone else’s child. They had never heard of a criminal case involving infant feeding and did not understand what they were dealing with.

During their discussions, COWLHA and ICW-Malawi agreed that the prosecution of EL was a manifestation of stigma and misinformation about HIV in the community. They learned more about the unjust measures that EL had experienced, like being imprisoned without being given a chance to be heard and not being given the chance to prepare and take her medication and things she needed to care for her child. COWLHA and ICW decided to get involved.

Representatives from COWLHA and ICW meet with members of EL’s village. Photo: COWLHA/ICW

Concerned that EL could face social and community hostility after her release, COWHLA and ICW planned a visit to the village to provide psychosocial support to EL and to work with traditional community leaders to provide community sensitisation on HIV, addressing issues of stigma and discrimination. Their efforts helped change some community members’ ideas about HIV.

The community formed two support groups— one for youth and another for adults (notably both were predominantly female groups). They have conducted numerous activities, including home visits, supporting children to go to school, helping the elderly with house chores, and they have a garden where they grow vegetables and rice. They hoped to access loans to become self-reliant. They also had a list of issues they wanted to learn more about, including preventing mother-to-child transmission, sexual and reproductive health, positive living, stigma and discrimination, and treatment literacy.

Visiting EL at home

In September 2019, a three-member team comprising Edna Tembo (Executive Director of COWLHA), Charity Mkona (ICW Board Chair), and Peter Gwazayani (media consultant), set out for EL’s village.

The team was welcomed by the Group Village Headman, who took them to EL’s house. EL recognised Edna from the work COWLHA and ICW-Malawi had done in the community previously. EL welcomed the team with a big smile.

EL and her husband looked cheerful as they laid a mat on the veranda of their house for the visitors. Her mother later joined the discussion.

EL was interested to learn that HJN wanted to write about her case and the type of interventions that had been helpful, to share the story with advocates for HIV justice around the world.

EL recounted that when she returned to the village, “most members of my community received me with happiness, particularly my relatives. The day I arrived, they were jubilant. They celebrated with songs that we normally sing during special occasions in the village.”

COWLHA ED Edna Tembo and Charity Mkona of ICW chat with EL, her husband and her mother (at far distance). Photo: COWLHA/ICW

EL lives with her husband, five children and her mother in a compound made up of three grass thatched houses. She introduced her children:

“The oldest is 13 and she goes to school, as do the second and third. The fourth, a little girl, is the child I was with in prison. She has not yet started school. And then there is this one, who I am breastfeeding. She is the fifth one. She has been tested for HIV on two occasions and will be going for the last test soon. The other two tests have come back HIV-negative.”

EL’s accuser and her family still lives in the same village which has presented some difficulties. EL said that on several occasions she had tried to greet them when they passed each other, but she had been ignored. “They don’t talk to me but from deep down in my heart, I have no grudges against them,” EL said.  “I am just living my normal life,” EL says, although now she says that she would never agree to carry anybody else’s child, for any reason.

Moving beyond criminalisation

With respect to the community-level interventions, lawyer Annabel Raw, who worked at SALC during the time they supported the EL case said:

“As lawyers, we would never have thought to consider such an intervention had ICW-Malawi and COWLHA not shared their insights and been willing to support the client and her community. Their work has been so important to ensuring that meaningful justice was done to combat the actual root cause of the prosecution — stigma and discrimination — and to reconcile EL with her community.”

Engaging with the community also influenced ICW-Malawi and COWLHA’s thinking about HIV criminalisation. COWLHA’s Edna Tembo noted that:

Supporting people who have been prosecuted, particularly women, gives them power, … However, it is very important to stress that psychological support is absolutely vital for those who have been prosecuted. That includes family support, and a supportive community environment enabling acceptance of an individual accused.”

Tembo was also quick to emphasise that there is more work to be done. That work includes awareness raising and ongoing support to the community, especially to identify and train volunteers, empowering them to provide services at community level and to link them to health facilities and district offices for continued support and mentorship.

EL carries her youngest child home. Photo: Amos Gumulira/UNDP Malawi

EL described her dreams for the future:

“My wish now is to see my children progress in school so that they become productive citizens in this community and help it grow. That’s my dream. If they get educated, they will be able to stand on their own and support others. My husband is not employed and it is a challenge to get money for school fees for our children. We would love to get a loan or training to have greater knowledge of economic empowerment because we want to be self-reliant. We would then love to lease some land to grow rice to sell to pay back the loan.

“It’s also my wish to see the lives of all people in the community uplifted. We farm but on a small-scale. If we were to be supported with funds, I’d love to see the community establish big rice farms, working in groups, harvesting for consumption and for sale. In so doing, we would be able to uplift our lives for the better.”

Further Information

Learn more about Wesley’s experiences in EL’s case here and here.

Learn more about the African Regional Judges Forum here.

The full High Court judgement is available here, with a summary included here.

Read more about the successful HIV and AIDS Management Act community advocacy here.


This article is based on information provided by ICW-Malawi and COWLHA following their visits to EL’s village, and an interview with Wesley Mwafulirwa published by UNDP. HJN provided financial and logistical support for the village visits thanks to a grant provided to the HIV Justice Global Consortium from the Robert Carr Fund for civil society networks.