US: New report explores how HIV criminal laws in California are enforced against foreign born populations

FOR IMMIGRANTS, HIV CRIMINALIZATION CAN MEAN INCARCERATION AND DEPORTATION 

New Study Shows 15 Percent of People who had Contact with Californa Criminal System because of HIV Criminalization Laws were Foreign Born

LOS ANGELES – A new study suggests that for some immigrants, an HIV-specific criminal offense may have been the triggering event for their deportation proceedings.  In HIV Criminalization Against Immigrants in California, Williams Institute Scholars Amira Hasenbush and Bianca D.M. Wilson, explore how HIV criminal laws are enforced in California, particularly against foreign born populations.

HIV criminalization is a term used to describe statutes that either criminalize otherwise legal conduct or that increase the penalties for illegal conduct based upon a person’s HIV-positive status.  California has four HIV-specific criminal laws, and one non-HIV-specific criminal law that criminalizes exposure to any communicable disease.  All HIV-specific offenses in California have the potential to lead to deportation proceedings.

“People living with HIV still face stigma and discrimination,” said Amira Hasenbush.  “If one is HIV-positive and enters the criminal system, one may be more severely impacted than those who are HIV-negative.  A major impact for HIV positive immigrants is possible deportation, possibly a far worse outcome than the original sentence.  Living with HIV is a public health matter, not a criminal one.”

Key Findings:

-Overall, 800 people have come into contact with the California criminal system from 1988 to June 2014 related to that person’s HIV-positive status.  Among those individuals, 121 (15 percent) were foreign born.

-Thirty-six people, or 30 percent, of these foreign born individuals, had some form of a criminal immigration proceeding in their histories. Among those who had immigration proceedings in their records, nine people (25 percent) had those proceedings initiated immediately after an HIV-specific incident.

-Like their U.S. born counterparts, 94 percent of all HIV-specific incidents in which immigrants had contact with the criminal system were under California’s felony offense against solicitation while HIV-positive.

-Eighty-three percent of the immigrants who had contact with the system based on their HIV-positive status were born in Mexico, Central or South America, or the Caribbean.

-While U.S. born people were divided fairly evenly between men and women, immigrants were overwhelmingly men: 88 percent of foreign born individuals in the group were men. (It should be noted that “men” may include transgender male-to-female individuals.  Problems created by a lack of data on transgender people within criminal justice databases are highlighted in the report.)

HIV Criminalization Against Immigrants in California was developed by analyzing the California Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) data on HIV offenses in California, exploring the demographics and experiences of foreign born individuals as compared to their U.S. born counterparts. Future research beyond the enforcement data may explore whether initial patterns seen by sex and place of birth are perpetuated in other criminal systems or under other offenses. Future research can also explore the influence of sexual orientation and gender identity as a potential driver to the criminal system and as a potential mediating factor in experiences once in the system. This will help provide a more nuanced and complete picture of the experiences of people who are criminalized based on their HIV-positive status.

Read the report.

The Williams Institute, a think tank on sexual orientation and gender identity law and public policy, is dedicated to conducting rigorous, independent research with real-world relevance.

Australia: Up to 14 years jail sentences and compulsory testing for people spitting at police officers could be introduced in new legislation

Police in Australia are pushing for the introduction of a maximum 14 year jail sentence for people who spit at police officers.

The move comes after new figures reveal more than 1,000 officers are “exposed to bodily fluids” at work each year in the country.

Officers have routinely put there lives on hold for months to ensure they had not contracted any diseases.

South Australian Police Association president Mark Carroll said: ““When, in the course of duty, officers are spat on, bitten or otherwise assaulted in a way involving an exchange of bodily fluids, it’s essential that these officers have access to blood samples from the assailant that can be tested.”

The Adelaide Advertiser reported a case in May where a man spat at an officer and said: “I have HIV AIDS and now you’ve got it too”.

After sentencing the man to four and a half years in prison, Judge Rauf Soulio said: “Your comments about HIV caused him great distress. He felt unable to hold his infant daughter, who was born prematurely, for fear of passing on a communicable disease.”

“He had to deal with the fear of waiting for blood results, which were, fortunately, negative,” he added.

Speaking to the Daily Telegraph police minister Troy Grant has prepared new proposals saying he hopes to make it a “new offence with tough penalties for spitting on officers and a mandatory testing regimen for offenders who spit.”

In Ireland, the offence appears to be at the lower end of the punishment scale. The Herald reported in June 2015 where a man, Liam Deegan, was sentenced to a month in prison for spitting in a Garda’s face as he was being led to the cells following a court appearance.

The same paper reported another incident whereby another man, Shamsiytar Shafie, received a four month sentence in May 2015 for a similar offence.

Published in NewsTalk on Oct 2, 2016

 

HIV criminalisation advocacy must extend beyond HIV specific statutes

By Kate D’Adamo

From TheBody.com

September 29, 2016

The fight to combat HIV criminalization is not new. After years of activism, gains are finally being made to repeal statutes that turn a person’s knowledge of their HIV status into a crime.

Just this year, Colorado’s HIV modernization bill comprehensively repealed almost all of the HIV-specific statutes in the state. This is an evidence-based success: Criminalizing people’s HIV status does not inhibit HIV transmission, but instead turns their knowledge and treatment of that status into evidence of a crime. This weaponizes their knowledge and their enrollment in the very care public health officials recommend, forcing people to weigh testing and treatment against fear of arrest.

With the growing success in fighting HIV criminalization, it is now time for advocates to take the conversation beyond the repeal of HIV-specific statutes and to confront the larger context of how criminalization encourages HIV transmission.

The growing data on where and when laws criminalizing a person’s status are implemented show that the people in the crosshairs of these laws are often those already criminalized through their engagement in sex work. The ostensible targets of HIV criminalization laws may be people who are not otherwise criminalized, but the data clearly show who faces most of their impact. The more common way that people who are HIV positive are criminalized for their status is not through general HIV criminalization statutes, but through laws that upgrade a misdemeanor prostitution charge to a felony if a sex worker is HIV positive.

The Williams Institute looked at who is charged and convicted of HIV-specific statutes in California found that “[t]he vast majority (95%) of all HIV-specific criminal incidents impacted people engaged in sex work or individuals suspected of engaging in sex work.” Research out of Nashville, Tennessee, corroborated this picture, with charges disproportionately targeting people arrested for prostitution, who then faced a felony upgrade and (until last year) were required to register as sex offenders for being HIV positive. However, these laws are not the only way criminalization increases sex workers’ vulnerability to HIV transmission, and advocacy must expand its vision to include the fuller context.

At the Sex Workers Project, we work with individuals who trade sex across the spectrum of choice, circumstance and coercion. For sex workers, the relationship between criminalization and health is complex and deeply interwoven.

When we look at the role of HIV transmission in the lives of our clients and community, it is not simply HIV-specific statutes, but the tactics of policing and the instability created through criminalization that increase people’s vulnerability. If the long-term goal is to end the spread of HIV, advocacy should target criminalization more holistically and see HIV modernization, or the on-going state-by-state push to repeal these statutes, as just one of the initial steps needed to explore the nexus between public health and criminalization.

When we expand our scope beyond these specific statutes to look at how policing and criminalization encourage HIV transmission, a more complex and multi-layered picture emerges. For instance, the relationship between evidence of a crime and transmission of HIV does not end with simply knowing one’s status. Law enforcement’s use of condoms as evidence of prostitution has a chilling effect. In research on the impact of policing that uses safer-sex supplies as evidence of a crime, many sex workers reported that they were afraid to carry condoms or take condoms from outreach workers, regardless of whether they were engaging in prostitution at that time. Most impacted by these policing practices were transgender women of color, a population acknowledged to be already at higher risk for HIV transmission. Transgender women are commonly profiled as being engaged in sex work, and therefore, were most at risk for being arrested for the mere possession of condoms. This means that policing practices are actively putting the community with the highest vulnerability to HIV at even higher risk of transmission.

Further, policing procedures that inundate areas “known for prostitution” with law enforcement push sex workers into isolated locations to avoid arrest. This means isolation from peers who can provide harm reduction and safety, and from outreach workers who may offer resources — in addition to making sex workers vulnerable to physical and sexual assault, as physical isolation carries its own risk of HIV transmission.

The fight for HIV modernization bills across the country is already having a demonstrable success. The recent Colorado HIV modernization bill shows what a comprehensive policy can look like. Many other state-based efforts have made sure their work encompasses those most impacted by HIV-specific statutes and fought to include in their advocacy sex workers and organizations serving people who trade sex.

But these policy changes should not be where the momentum ends. HIV criminalization is only one part of the larger on-going dialogue on the nexus between criminalization and public health that deeply impacts the lives of marginalized communities. When more people understand how criminalization affects individual and public health, we can expand the impact of our work to address these larger issues and shift our goals to not just avoiding the criminalization of HIV, but also stemming its spread.

Kate D’Adamo is the national policy advocate at the Sex Workers Project at the Urban Justice Center, focusing on laws, policies and advocacy that target folks who trade sex, including the criminalization of sex work, anti-trafficking policies and HIV-specific laws. Previously, Kate was a community organizer and advocate for people in the sex trade with the Sex Workers Outreach Project-NYC and Sex Workers Action New York. She holds a BA in political Science from California Polytechnic State University and an MA in international affairs from the New School University.

Originally published in The Body on 29/09/2016

Zimbabwe: Activists call for HIV criminalisation law to be scrapped as it reversed public health gains in national HIV response

Paidamoyo Chipunza: Senior Health Reporter

On November 19, 2014, then Chinhoyi regional magistrate Mr Never Katiyo sentenced 39-year-old Nyengedzai Bheka to 15 years in prison for willfully transmitting HIV to a 17-year old pupil. In his ruling, Mr Katiyo said infection of that nature was tantamount to a death penalty on the girl since she was an immature minor. “This is a very rare case that we have had to deal with as the courts and we have to set a precedent that is deterrent to would-be offenders,” said Mr Katiyo.“Although it was a matter involving a single witness the court is convinced that there was deliberate infection.” Bheka’s case serves as both a template for discussion on aptness of wilful transmission of HIV as a law and as precedence to the 1,4 million Zimbabweans estimated to be living with HIV who by virtue of them being HIV positive are ‘‘potential criminals’’.

Elizabeth Tailor Human Rights Award winner and HIV activist, Ms Martha Tholanah said this law must be scrapped because it stigmatised and discriminated against people living with HIV. Ms Tholanah, who has been living with HIV for the past 14 years, said criminalisation of wilful HIV transmission was done a long time ago on the advent of the disease, when no one wanted to be associated with it. She, however, said owing to developments in the medical field, HIV is now just like any other disease hence the law must be informed by science trends. “Evidence has shown that chances of transmitting HIV to another person if you are on treatment are slim. The law must then speak the same language with science to achieve our national and global goals and targets,” said Ms Tholanah. She said the current law discouraged people from getting tested thereby delaying them from accessing treatment early, reversing global efforts to end Aids by 2030.

To end Aids by 2030, Zimbabwe adopted the United Nations goals popularly referred to as the 90-90-90 targets. These targets entail that at least 90 percent of people living with HIV must be tested by the year 2020. For those diagnosed with HIV, at least 90 percent of them must be on antiretroviral treatment and a further 90 percent of those on treatment must have their viral load fully suppressed by the year 2020.

“How do you get tested when you know that you risk being a criminal?” said Ms Tholanah. She said while science has proved that taking antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) actually reduced the risk of one transmitting HIV to another person, the law drew conclusions on deliberate HIV transmission from the fact that one was on ARVs — a direct contradiction of science.

Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights HIV and Law Unit project manager Mr Tinashe Mundawarara said HIV involved science and it was therefore difficult to ascertain the direction of infection even in developed countries where there is sophisticated equipment.

“It is still difficult to point out the direction of infection and also people might have acquired the same HIV genotype from a common source, which might also dismiss infection from the concerned partners,” said Mr Mundawarara.

Section 79 (1) of the Criminal Codification and Reform Act on deliberate transmission of HIV reads: “Any person who knowingly that he or she is infected with HIV, or realising that there is a real risk or possibility that he or she is infected with HIV, intentionally does anything or permits the doing of anything which he or she realises involves a real risk or possibility of infecting another person with HIV, shall be guilty of deliberate transmission of HIV, whether or not he or she is married to that other person and shall be liable to imprisonment for a period not exceeding twenty years.“It shall be a defence to a charge under subsection (1) for the accused to prove that the other person concerned knew that the accused was infected with HIV and consented to the act in question, appreciating the nature of HIV and the possibility of becoming infected with it.”

Mr Mundawarara said this law was too broad and that the accompanying defence on informing the other person and ‘‘appreciating the nature of HIV’’ was also vague making it difficult to prosecute and convict someone of committing a crime. He said the law itself was not clear on what understanding the nature of HIV meant.

“Does it mean the scientific or genetic make-up of the HIV virus or does it mean how HIV impacts on the immune system,” he said. Mr Mundawarara said the law also criminalised sex by people living with HIV and Aids, hence it infringed on their rights and promoted stigma and discrimination around HIV.  “One can still be charged even if transmission has not occurred because it says ‘ . . . real risk or possibility of infecting another person with HIV’. So, if you engage in unprotected sex which involves a real risk of transmitting HIV to another person, you risk being charged, thus making everyone living with HIV a potential criminal,” said Mr Mundawarara.

Mr Mundawarara said this legislation should therefore be scrapped as it reversed public health gains in national HIV and Aids response.He said the law can still punish people who willfully transmit HIV through other provisions such aggravated indecent assault.

Katswe Sisterhood director Ms Talet Jumo said the law was unfair on women who in most cases knew of their status first through antenatal care or voluntary testing, hence risked being charged of having infected their spouses. “Sometimes women may delay to inform their partners of their status due to fear of gender based violence and using that law, their partners may still drag them to the courts for deliberately transmitting HIV,” said Ms Jumo.

National Aids Council board chairman Mr Everisto Marowa said in line with the UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets, Zimbabwe must reduce new HIV infections from the current 64 000 a year to about 6 000 — a figure he described as a huge considering that HIV was preventable.He said NAC was aiming to have less than 1000 new infections by the year 2020.“NAC is geared for the task ahead and ready to provide the needed leadership with guidance from Government,” said Dr Marowa.

HIV remains a major public health threat in Zimbabwe with a prevalence rate of about 15 percent.

Vietnam: Vietnam Lawyers Association (VLA) and Global Fund for HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control Project to provide free legal aid to vulnerable groups in many areas, including civil and criminal issues

The Vietnam Lawyers Association (VLA) and Global Fund for HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control Project will implement the project on providing free legal aid services to vulnerable groups in HIV/AIDS prevention and control.

The information was given by the VLA at a conference on connection and access to legal support services for vulnerable groups in HIV/AIDS prevention and control recently organized in Hanoi.

The project, supported by the Vietnam Union of Science and Technology Associations (VUSTA), will be implemented in five localities, including Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh city, Dong Nai, Quang Ninh and Thai Binh.

It aims to support and guarantee legitimate rights and interests of groups such as injection drug users, prostitutes, homosexuals and transgenders.

Their understanding of law and basic knowledge about HIV/AIDS is limited, leading to stigma and discrimination. Besides, these groups are not beneficiaries of free legal aid under the provisions of the law on legal aid. Therefore, it is essential to build the model of consultation and legal aid free of charge for these groups.

Speaking at the workshop, Doctor and Lawyer Trinh Thi Le Tram, Director of the centre for legal counselling and health policy for HIV/AIDS, said vulnerable people in HIV/AIDS prevention and control include: people infected with and affected by HIV/AIDS, injection drug users, prostitutes and homosexuals.

According to Ms. Tram, the number of customers calling the hotline 18001521, requiring counselling on HIV/AIDS and related legislation, continued to increase over the years. In 2009, there were more than 1,900 calls but in 2014, the figure rose to more than 3,000. However, these numbers are still very small compared to the total of more than 200,000 people living with HIV across the country today.

Demand for legal consulting and aid is there in many areas, such as labor, job, marriage and family, criminal and civil issues.

According to Ms. Tram, legal counselling and aid for people living with HIV at state’s centres for legal aid meet many difficulties and shortcomings, such as procedure, identification public issues, and centres are often located within the campus of government agencies with no separate living space.

In addition, interdisciplinary agencies and VLAs of 63 localities nationwide should have activities to consult and support legislation for local people infected with and affected by HIV/AIDS.

In particular, the national target program on HIV/AIDS prevention and control every year should structure the budget for the legal consultancy and assistance for people infected with and affected by HIV/AIDS

Canada: Global Fund Replenishment Conference puts the spotlight on Canada HIV criminalisation laws

Friday and Saturday, Montreal will play host to the Fifth Replenishment Conference of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. While much of the discussion will be focused on developing countries (the Global South), where the fund has played a crucial role since is creation in 2002, this is also an appropriate time to take stock of Canadian realities.

At a time when the global effort is suffering from precarious funding, Canada has stepped up to the plate by increasing its contribution by 20 per cent, to a total of $785 million over the next three years. This commitment is to be applauded. It proves that there is a willingness on the part of government to make Canada a leader once again on the international scene. It is also a promising reminder that increased donations will get us closer to beating these diseases once and for all.

But good leadership also puts the spotlight on Canada’s own responsibility to address human-rights issues that are impediments to the improvement of public health and fair access to health services.

In the HIV sector, we know that gender inequality, racism and homophobia are the breeding grounds for the epidemic. Poverty and discrimination are further barriers to access and care. As was recently pointed out by Canada’s Minister of International Development and La Francophonie, Marie-Claude Bibeau, HIV has a particularly heavy impact on young women.

In order to continue to play its part as an international leader, Canada has to make good on commitments to end these epidemics here at home. We have work to do in our own backyard in order to align the fight against HIV/AIDS with human-rights advocacy.

Canada in 2016 is a country that still imposes criminal penalties on people living with HIV: they still risk prison sentences for having sexual relations without disclosing their HIV status to their partners when they have taken the necessary precautions to avoid transmission (use of a condom or undetectable viral load), and when there has been no transmission. This increases stigma, goes against science and UNAIDS recommendations, and should not be the case in a country that otherwise is helping lead the way.

Leadership comes from inspiring the best public policy, especially when it is supported by scientific data. In this regard, Canada must go farther and support the opening of supervised-injection sites. Such harm-reduction approaches are proven to reduce rates of infection.

Furthermore, we must work to create social and legal frameworks that help sex workers, as recommended by such NGOs  as Amnesty International. It is crucial that we repeal Bill C-36, the so-called “Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act” that criminalizes sex work in Canada.

This major international event will also be an opportunity to highlight how these epidemics affect migrants. Mandatory testing by immigration authorities contradicts recommendations by Canadian health experts. Rejecting migrants on the basis of their HIV or health status continues to foster prejudice in this regard. Economic arguments for refusing them entry only serve to exacerbate such inequalities. It is high time to look at universal access to treatment and the real cost of its being denied to certain people.

The Global Fund Replenishment Conference is a fitting time to demonstrate Canada’s financial support for countries most affected by HIV, TB, and malaria. Canada’s commitment to international aid is a solid foundation for global action on these issues.

But now is also the time for us to lead by example in our own country. There is much work to be done before we can truly “End it. For Good.” We need concrete measures that show Canadians stand with and support HIV-positive people.

Gabriel Girard is a post-doctoral researcher in sociology at Université de Montréal. Pierre-Henri Minot is executive director of Portail VIH/sida du Québec in Montreal. This article is based on an open letter that has been co-signed by more than 150 others. The full list is available at pvsq.org/globalfunds2016.

Mexico: HIV Justice Worldwide supports Mexican organisations' constitutional challenge against law criminalising HIV transmission in the State of Veracruz

English translation (para la versión en español,  ver más abajo)

International organisations support the constitutional challenge against the law criminalizing HIV transmission in Veracruz

Before the amendment to Article 158 of the Criminal Code of Veracruz, entitled “Contagion”, which added the term Sexually Transmitted Diseases to the article, and was adopted on August 4, 2015 by the Congress of the State, the National Commission on Human Rights, in response to the request of the Multisectoral Group on HIV / AIDS and STIs of the State of Veracruz and other organisations of civil society, brought the constitutional challenge 139/2015 against the amendment to the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation this past December.

This is because the legal reform indicates that among these infections, HIV and human papilloma virus are outlined and a penalty ranging from 6 months to 5 years in prison and a fine of up to 50 days salary is established for those “deceitfully” infecting another person of any sexually transmitted disease.

The reform presented by Deputy Monica Robles Barajas from the Ecologist Green Party of Mexico, was intended to “try to prevent the transmission of these infections, mainly to women and girls who are in a vulnerable position…”.

Unconstitutionality

For the CNDH, the new content of Article 158 of the Criminal Code of the State of Veracruz “generates a discriminatory treatment to the detriment of the people, and that criminalising the willful endangerment of disease transmission, generates two assumptions: that it concerns sexually transmitted infections and that it concerns serious diseases. “

In addition, he said the agency does not meet its objective of preventing the spread of sexually transmitted infections against women and girls, finding themselves in vulnerable situations, but that it create a differentiation based on the condition of certain types of infections, in this case of sexual transmission, and that it casts them as serious, a fact that is not real, because not all infections of this type are serious.

International support

A little after half a year after the appeal, organisations of international civil society such a HIV Justice Worlwide have delivered a letter to the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation for the legal challenge to be considered as “there is no evidence that criminalising perceived or potential exposure to HIV or STI benefits prevention; however, there are serious concerns that criminalisation can cause considerable damage. “

The document submitted to the Court, reminds us that various international bodies such as UNAIDS, the Special Rapporteur on the right to health to the United Nations, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law and the World Health Organization, have recommended to governments to limit the use of criminal law to the extremely exceptional cases of intentional transmission of HIV (for example, when the person knows their own HIV positive status, acts with the intention to transmit HIV, and in fact transmit it).

The letter also notes that laws criminalizing HIV affect the rights of people with HIV because they cause confusion and fear about their duties under the law; they generate failures in the justice system, often as a result of inadequately informed and competent legal representation;  they risk triggering prosecutions as a means of abuse or retaliation against a current or former partner; Police investigations are disproportionate and insensitive and can cause stigma and discrimination, and they promote sentences and disproportionate penalties.

In addition, fear of prosecution may discourage people, especially those belonging to those populations highly vulnerable to HIV, to get tested and know their status, because many laws apply only to those who are aware of their HIV status and thus prevent access to care and treatment because medical records can be used in evidence against them in the courts.

Worrying situation

Patricia Ponce, researcher at the Center for Research and Studies on Social Anthropology and member of the Multisectoral Group on STI and HIV / AIDS of the State of Veracruz, stated that the situation in the state is worrying because it is the region with the third highest number of cumulative cases of AIDS throughout Mexico, the second in HIV cases, the second in the number of women living with the virus and the second in the number of children affected by HIV.

Meanwhile, Edwin J. Bernard, global coordinator of the HIV Justice Network Worldwide, said that the fight against the epidemic requires the eradication of stigma and discrimination, not to add further through the legal system.

For the specific case of Veracruz, he explained that “if you want to protect women and girls from HIV, what should be done is to strengthen and empower women”.

Sean Strub, CEO of the Sero Project of the United States, explained that the existence of laws that criminalize HIV transmission is a public health issue because sanction reduces the possibility of new diagnoses.

“The best way to combat the criminalization of HIV is that people with the virus raise their hands to eradicate the situation,” he added.

Alejandro Brito, director of the civil organization Letra S, warned that if this situation is allowed to pass, “this can become a domino effect and similar changes could be approved in other states.”

In this regard, Ricardo Hernandez Forcada, director of the Programme for HIV AIDS and Human Rights at CNDH said that practically in every state, and even in federal criminal codes, there is a penalty for the transmission of sexually transmitted infections, and it is known that in Baja California Sur people have been jailed under that criterion.

——————————————————————————————————-

Organizaciones internacionales respaldan acción de inconstitucionalidad contra la ley que criminaliza transmisión del VIH en Veracruz

Ante la modificación al artículo 158 del Código Penal de Veracruz, denominado “Del Contagio”, a fin de adicionar el término Infecciones de Transmisión Sexual, aprobada el 4 de agosto de 2015 por el congreso de la entidad, la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos, en respuesta a la petición del Grupo Multisectorial en VIH/sida e ITS del estado de Veracruz y otras organizaciones de la sociedad civil, interpuso la acción de inconstitucionalidad 139/ 2015 en contra de la reforma en la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación en diciembre pasado.

Eso, debido a que la reforma legal señala que entre dichas infecciones se contempla al VIH y al virus del papiloma humano y se establece una pena que va de los 6 meses a los 5 años de prisión y multa de hasta 50 días de salario para quien “dolosamente” infecte a otra persona de alguna enfermedad de transmisión sexual.

La reforma, presentada por la diputada Mónica Robles Barajas del Partido Verde Ecologista de México, tenía la finalidad de “tratar de prevenir la transmisión de dichas infecciones, principalmente a las mujeres y las niñas que se encuentren en condición de vulnerabilidad…”.

Acción de inconstitucionalidad

Para la CNDH, el nuevo contenido del artículo 158 del Código Penal del Estado de Veracruz “genera  un  trato discriminatorio  en  perjuicio de las personas, ya que al tipificar como delito la  puesta  dolosa en peligro de contagio de enfermedades, genera dos supuestos: que se trate de  infecciones de transmisión sexual y que se trate de enfermedades graves”.

Además, señaló el organismo, no cumple su objetivo de prevenir la transmisión de infecciones sexuales hacia mujeres y niñas, por encontrarse en condiciones de vulnerabilidad,  sino que provocó una diferenciación basada en el padecimiento de  cierto  tipo  de  infecciones,  en  este  caso  de  transmisión sexual, y calificarlas como graves, hecho que no es real, pues no todas las infecciones de este corte son graves.

Respaldo internacional

A poco más de medio año de haberse presentado el recurso, organizaciones de la sociedad civil internacionales como Red Justicia por VIH en todo el Mundo entregaron una carta a la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación para solicitar la admisión del recurso legal tomando en cuenta que “no hay evidencia de que criminalizar la exposición potencial o percibida al VIH o ITS beneficie la prevención; sin embargo, hay serias preocupaciones de que la criminalización puede causar un daño considerable”.

En el documento entregado a la Corte, se recuerda que diversos organismos internacionales como el Programa Conjunto de las Naciones Unidas sobre el VIH/Sida, el Relator Especial del derecho a la salud de las Naciones Unidas, la Comisión Global de VIH y la Ley y la Organización Mundial de la Salud han recomendado a los gobiernos limitar el uso del derecho penal a situaciones extremadamente excepcionales casos de transmisión intencional de VIH (por ejemplo, cuando la persona conoce su propio estatus seropositivo, actúa con la intención de transmitir el VIH, y de hecho lo transmite).

La misiva también señala que las leyes que criminalizan al VIH afectan los derechos de las personas con VIH porque provocan confusión y miedo sobre obligaciones en virtud de la ley; generan fallas en los sistemas de justicia, a menudo como resultado de una representación legal inadecuadamente informada y competente; surgen amenazas que desencadenan el enjuiciamiento como medio de abuso o represalia contra una pareja actual o anterior; las investigaciones policiales son desproporcionadas e insensibles, pudiendo provocar estigma y discriminación, y propicia condenas y sanciones desproporcionadas.

Además, el miedo al procesamiento judicial puede desalentar a las personas, especialmente a aquellas pertenecientes a poblaciones altamente vulnerables al VIH, de examinarse y conocer su estatus, porque muchas leyes se aplican sólo a quienes son conscientes de su estatus seropositivo e impide el acceso a la atención y tratamiento porque las historias clínicas pueden ser usadas como evidencia en su contra en las Cortes.

Situación preocupante

Para Patricia Ponce, investigadora del Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios sobre Antropología Social Unidad Golfo e integrante del Grupo Multisectorial en ITS y VIH/sida del Estado de Veracruz, la situación en el estado es preocupante debido a que es la entidad con el tercer número más alto de casos acumulados de sida de toda la República Mexicana, el segundo de casos de VIH, el segundo en número de mujeres viviendo con el virus y el segundo con niños afectados por VIH.

Por su parte, Edwin J. Bernard, coordinador global de la Red Justicia por VIH en todo el Mundo, consideró que el combate contra la epidemia requiere erradicar el estigma y la discriminación, no añadirle aún más a través del orden jurídico.

Para el caso concreto de Veracruz, explicó que “si se quiere proteger a las mujeres y niñas del VIH, lo que se debe hacer es fortalecerlas y empoderarlas”.

Sean Strub, director ejecutivo de Sero Project de los Estados Unidos, explicó que la existencia de leyes que penalizan la transmisión del VIH son un asunto de salud pública porque sancionar reduce la posibilidad de realizar nuevos diagnósticos.

“La mejor manera de combatir la criminalización del VIH es que las personas con el virus alcen la mano para erradicar la situación”, añadió.

Alejandro Brito, director de la organización civil Letra S, advirtió que si se deja pasar la situación, “esta se puede convertir en un efecto domino y podrían aprobarse modificaciones similares en otros estados”.

Al respecto, Ricardo Hernández Forcada, director del Programa de VIH SIDA y Derechos Humanos de la CNDH, señaló que, prácticamente, en todos los códigos penales estatales, e incluso el federal, hay alguna penalización por la transmisión de  infecciones de transmisión sexual, y se tiene conocimiento de que en Baja California Sur se ha encarcelado gente bajo dicho criterio.

Fuente: Notiese

 

HIV IS NOT A CRIME Training Academy (HINAC2)
Huntsville, Alabama

(33 min, HJN, USA, 2016)

HIV JUSTICE WORLDWIDE presents a video documentary on the second-ever ‘HIV IS NOT A CRIME’ training academy held in Huntsville, Alabama.

To support advocates on how to effectively strategise on ending HIV criminalisation, this 30-minute video distils the content of this unique, three-day training academy into four overarching themes: survivors, victories, intersectionality and community.

We hope this video can be used as a starting point to help advocates move forward in their own state or country plans to achieve HIV justice.

For more information about the training academy visit: http://www.hivisnotacrime.com/

Uganda: ABC Radio interviews HIV criminalisation survivor, Rosemary Namubiru, and UGANET’s Dora Kiconco Musinguzi

Listen to Natasha Mitchell compelling interview with HIV criminalisation survivor, Rosemary Namubiru, and UGANET’s Dora Kiconco Musinguzi on the challenge to the problematic HIV criminalisation statutes within Uganda’s HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control Act.

This seven minute audio report from AIDS 2016 in Durban is excerpted from ABC Radio’s longer podcast, The brutal politics of a virus that won’t go away, by reporter Natasha Mitchell for Background Briefing. 

Listen to and/or download the full podcast and read the transcript on ABC Radio’s website.

The transcript of Natasha’s HIV criminalisation-related report is below.

Natasha Mitchell: In Uganda, around 7% of people are infected, and while the country is recognised for taking decisive action against HIV, the government’s harsh attitude and laws is dramatically undermining that progress.

Rosemary Namubiru is a 66-year-old nurse, mother and grandmother. She found out she had the virus just three years ago, and she thinks she got it from a patient.

Rosemary hadn’t yet disclosed her status at work, but when she was wrongly accused of intentionally infecting a patient, before she knew it the full force of the law was thrown at her.

Rosemary Namubiru: I saw the police coming, and they were holding me, ‘You are under arrest for murder.’ Then they called the media, so when I was in that room they called and told me, ‘Come out.’ I came out and I found a crowd of cameramen, media people.

Natasha Mitchell: Outside the police station?

Rosemary Namubiru: Yes.

Natasha Mitchell: Rosemary was charged with attempted murder after she accidentally pricked herself with a needle while treating a child. The mother watching on was worried and reported Rosemary. While the child wasn’t infected, thankfully, all hell broke loose when Rosemary’s HIV positive status was confirmed and made public. Rosemary was arrested and paraded in front of the media, who labelled her a ‘killer’ and a ‘murderer’.

Rosemary Namubiru: They were trying to manhandle me. They were taking photographs of me. They were calling me all sorts of names, ‘Murderer, killer. Look at this woman, a killer, a murderer.’ And it went all over the country in the national newspapers, in the English newspapers. ‘That murderer, the murderer. If we see her we shall beat her, we shall kill her.’ It was the talk of town. Even my village. Initially, they labelled it as ‘murder’. Then it was reduced, ‘attempted murder’, and then it was eventually changed into ‘negligence’.

Natasha Mitchell: Rosemary was publicly shamed, and sentenced to three years in prison for negligence.

Lawyer Dora Kiconco Musinguzi is the executive director of Uganda Network on Law, Ethics and HIV/AIDS or UGANET.

Dora Kiconco Musinguzi: Rosemary’s story sent so many chills across the country amongst people living with HIV. She was the headline of the news. ‘Killer nurse’. ‘Monster nurse’. She was treated so cruelly at the police, she was beaten, her hair was pulled, right, left, and centre, and that caused a lot of fear among people living with HIV. So we see discrimination written on walls, written in political statements, discrimination is still real, so that is where we are. That’s Uganda’s story currently.

Natasha Mitchell: Rosemary Namubiru was released at the end of 2014 after her case received international attention.

In the same year, Uganda introduced the HIV Prevention and Control Act. At face value it’s about controlling HIV, promoting testing and treatment, and preventing discrimination. Uganda’s not alone here, HIV specific criminal laws are on the increase worldwide, and also exist in America and Europe.

But Dora Kiconco Musinguzi and colleagues are leading a legal challenge in the Ugandan Constitutional Court against key parts of the law, including certain provisions that demand disclosure of your HIV status, and criminalise those who transmit the virus intentionally.

Dora Kiconco Musinguzi: The question is at what point do you establish intention. In a circumstance where we have so many people that have not yet tested, how do you know that a person infected another? So anybody could blame the other for infecting them, and what should be a human condition, a disease, then becomes a criminal object and lives break, and families break, and you know how the media picks on this, and totally takes it out of context. We believe it’s going to be really dangerous.

Natasha Mitchell: At least half of the Ugandan population still don’t know their HIV status. And Dora Kinconco Musinguzi believes the HIV Prevention and Control Act will exacerbate their reluctance to get tested and treated and so cause the virus to spread.

Dora Kiconco Musinguzi: So if people fear, relate HIV testing with obligation, with imprisonment, with undue power of the law, we believe this is going to create a bigger barrier to testing, and that fails the objective of prevention and control because then we shall have more people left out of the treatment area.

Natasha Mitchell: And because pregnant women have to be tested for HIV, they’re at greater risk under this law.

Dora Kiconco Musinguzi: They are going to be found to be HIV positive fast, and if they don’t disclose then they are in the ambit of attempting to transmit, so that makes the women criminals. So there’s lots of unanswered questions. And yet on the other side science has given us hope that people who test and take their medicines very well, they become less infectious, so they don’t transmit HIV. The law neglects this science. The law does not consider what public health specialists are saying, but the Ugandan government has not put this into consideration.

Natasha Mitchell: The experience of Rosemary Namubiru is a cautionary lesson about why laws that criminalise HIV positive people can be so bad for public health.

Dora Kiconco Musinguzi: You shouldn’t be criminalised. These cases could be handled in another way. We are really asking the Constitutional Court to find out whether this is the law that will present and control HIV, and still afford dignity and non-discrimination for living with HIV.

Natasha Mitchell: Based on your experience, Rosemary, what do you feel about the criminalisation law in Uganda against people with HIV?

Rosemary Namubiru: It hurts. Ignorance kills, but it hurts when people just carry on, and people keep on saying, ‘Oh, that one, that one.’ Me, I didn’t get it sexually. It was during the course of saving lives of human beings, so it is not something to laugh about. I wouldn’t wish anybody to go through what I went through.

Natasha Mitchell: Rosemary Namubiru. She’s now retired from nursing.

Uganda: Uganda Network on Law, Ethics, and HIV (UGANET) leads call to repeal some provisions of the HIV/Aids Prevention and Control law as discriminatory and unconstitutional

Uganda: Activists Go to Court As Call Raises for Equal Rights for People With HIV/Aids

By Mercy Nalugo

HIV/Aids activists delegations comprising policy makers, medical practitioners, researchers, sex workers and other key stakeholders converged in Durban, South Africa, last month for this year’s International Aids Conference.

The conference was geared towards forging ways and sharing knowledge on new developments and what ought to be done to reduce new infections as well as sharing experiences and analysing statistics related to the HIV/Aids trend.

The five-day conference, which kicked off on July 18, was marked under the theme “Access Equity Rights Now”.

Back in the country, in a bid to step up activism and rhyme with this year’s theme, HIV/Aids activists called on the government to implement the right to equity.

Taking to court

More than 100 civil society groups led by the Uganda Network on Law, Ethics, and HIV (UGANET) reiterated calls to have some of the clauses in the controversial HIV/Aids Prevention and Control law repealed saying they are discriminatory and unconstitutional.

This time they did not petition President Museveni, or other implementing agencies having been frustrated several times before, but the Constitutional Court.

They are asking the court to quash some provisions in the HIV/Aids law they say are unconstitutional and promote discrimination and stigmatisation of those with the disease.

One of the contested clauses allows medical practitioners to disclose a client’s HIV status to others.

 

The law would according to activists contravene the right for HIV positive people to keep their status confidential and would in essence promote stigma while criminalisation of the spread would keep away people from testing.

The same activists in May 2014 strongly opposed certain sections days after Parliament had passed the Bill into law.

They included the Human Rights Watch, Health Global Advocacy Project and the Uganda Network on Law and Ethics and HIV/Aids (UGANET) who said it is “deeply flawed” and promotes “discrimination”.

They later sought the attention of President Museveni asking him not to assent to the law although this did not stop him from doing so. However, the President assented to the law on July 31, 2014.

According to statistics released by the ministry of Health last year, the number of people starting anti-retroviral treatment (ART) in Uganda stood at 713,744.

In just three months, between June and September 2014, a total of 33,744 people enrolled for HIV/Aids treatment, raising the overall number from the previous 680,000 to the above-mentioned number (713,744).

The drugs suppress HIV multiplication in the body.

Activists, however, say that the hardline approach to prevention of HIV/Aids spread has instead discouraged those living with HIV from voluntary testing for fear of victimisation.

 
 

Infringment on rights

According to the activists, some clauses were passed without the amendments sought by an all-encompassing network.

 

Prosper Byonanebye, UGANET head of programmes, says: “The petition among others challenges section 18 (e), on ‘Disclosure of one’s HIV status to undisclosed parties. This is overly-broad, vaguely worded and thus unclear.

It also raises legality questions and infringes on the right to privacy. Same as Section 41 of the HIV prevention and Control Act on attempted transmission which is subject to misuse and can be a ticket to punish innocent Ugandans by self-seekers because it is not specific and it’s difficult to define.

According to Byonanebye, some of the clauses infringe on the right to equality and right to dignity and worsens discrimination hence pushing people living with HIV into hiding instead of the intended policy objective of supporting more of them to disclose as has been the case.

Chapter four of the Constitution emphasises the promotion and protection of several human rights and freedoms by the state including equality and freedom from discrimination (Article 21), right to dignity (Article 24) and right to privacy ( Article 27) among others.

Arguments for the Act

On disclosure of one’s status to other people, Maj (Rtd) Rubaramira Ruranga, a leading HIV/Aids advocate, however tows a different line.

He stresses the need for HIV positive people to open up about their status if solutions are to be found.

“Methodology is what we need to look into to find solutions to the wide spread of HIV/Aids and stigma, which is closely related to HIV/Aids. If we had a method of going house to house and educate the masses about the dangers of HIV and the need to know their status, the infection rate would be reduced. If we test from house to house, we would get rid of stigma,” he says.

 

“I no longer believe in confidentiality because people have continued to sleep with each other without bothering about the need to test. We should stop hiding something which can be served better Let us fight the conspiracy of the unknown.”

Commenting about the intentional spread of HIV/Aids, Maj Ruranga backs the proposal saying it will go a long way in protecting innocent Ugandans from selfish offenders who knowingly conceal their results away from their partners and infect them with HIV/Aids.

He noted: “Not everybody is bad but there are those spreading HIV intentionally. We do work with a team of young people but we have discovered that some health workers are giving false results at a request.

People know that they are reactive but ask for non-reactive results. I have arrested some and we are still arresting many. What other method is workable other than the law? Let the activists prove beyond reasonable doubt that this law will not work.”

Maj Ruranga adds that the country has lived with the deadly disease for over two decades and it has continued to spread.

“We have become so negligent as a result of pampering certain things. Why should the virus continue spreading? My coming out helped so many. Why do people continue hiding? We need to get out of this and find a solution.”

He emphasises the use of condoms as a preventive measure to guard against HIV/Aids as he opposed calls from the South African conference pushing for PEP to be given to the youth free of charge as a way of guarding against the spread of HIV.