People diagnosed HIV-positive are to be barred from becoming teachers in Guangdong Province, according to a draft regulation issued by the provincial education department on Sunday. The draft stipulates that people who are HIV-positive, and those who have other infectious diseases like hepatitis and venereal diseases, cannot be certified as a teacher, which would contravene national laws that state employers can not discriminate against HIV/AIDS carriers, an activist told the Global Times Monday.
Judge Orders Alabama to Stop Segregation of HIV Prisoners in Alabama
Decision from ACLU Lawsuit Paves Way for HIV Prisoners to Have Access to Services, Classes and Training Available to Other Prisoners FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org MONTGOMERY, Ala. — A federal judge today ordered Alabama to stop segregating prisoners living with HIV, ruling that the practice violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Australian Government buries report on laws and policies that negatively impact the HIV response, including HIV criminalisation
Federal Health Minister Tanya Plibersek has refused to release a report which HIV advocates and health professionals say is vital to meeting a target to reduce HIV infections in Australia. The report is the result of three years of work by a Ministerial Advisory Committee set up to examine legal issues, discrimination and stigma in different states arising from laws such as criminalisation of non-disclosure of a person’s HIV status. The report, which has the lengthy title of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on Blood Borne Viruses and STIs (MACBBVS) Legal Working Group Report, was finalised earlier this year and sent to the minister for final consideration.
Uganda: Government plans forced HIV testing, mandatory disclosure, 'knowing' transmission prosecutions
National In Summary However, if implemented, the new policy is likely to face strong opposition from civil society and human rights groups. Anyone who visits a health centre or hospital for treatment will be required to undergo an HIV test if Health Ministry officials get approval for a new plan.
UK: Sentencing guidelines for grievous bodily harm discussed in Guardian article about changes to sex offender sentencing guidance
Changes are in the pipeline for the sentencing of sex offenders. But what principles govern how long a criminal is jailed for? To take one category of offence, assaults involving grievous bodily harm, there are nine steps that must be followed. The first two are the most important. Step one weighs up how serious the offence is by measuring the harm done and the culpability of the offender. Greater harm is indicated by “serious” injury to the victim, a sustained or repeated attack and the personal circumstances of the victim. But the definition of serious injury is again fundamentally contentious. Culpability is governed by another 15 factors, including premeditation, use of a weapon, or having taken on the leading role in a gang. The 19 factors, in total, put the offence into one of three categories of seriousness.
Step two sets out the range of any jail sentence. Depending on the category of seriousness, a sentence will range from 9-16 years, 5-9 years, or for the least harm and culpability 3-5. Steps three to nine look at mitigating factors, reduction for guilty pleas and a range of other technical issues. The 27 pages of assault guidelines on their own have the potential to baffle even a hardy layman. “I have the greatest sympathy with the public,” says Sir Louis Blom-Cooper, a QC and legal academic. “The system for sentencing is immensely complicated even for judges.”
Botswana: Proposed Public Health Bill goes against HIV programming best practice
Guest blog by Christine Stegling, Associate Director, Best Practice, and Senior Human Rights Adviser, International HIV/AIDS Alliance.
Reposted with permission from the International HIV/AIDS Alliance.
Late last week, and by all accounts with no previous public debate or discussion with relevant civil society representatives, a new public health bill was debated in Botswana’s parliament that surprised and shocked many activists. According to the Alliance’s Linking Organisation in the country, Botswana Network on Ethics, Law and HIV/AIDS (BONELA), this bill did not pass through the prescribed channels of consultation which would allow those most affected, such as people living with HIV and medical practitioners, to fully understand the rationale for the bill and to participate in shaping any kind of law reform.
The bill makes provisions that go against all better knowledge of a best practice approach to HIV programming based on the respect of human rights and leading to positive public health outcomes for all. For example it provides for non-consensual HIV testing, HIV testing without the knowledge of the patient and the possibility for doctors and dentists to require an HIV test before undergoing medical or dental procedures. It also proposes that people living with HIV inform any sexual partner or care givers of their status, regardless of the actual risk of transmission.
While some of the latter provisions are undoubtedly aimed at reducing the risk of future HIV infections, the bill as it stands undermines public health efforts to encourage people to learn about their HIV status and puts a disproportionate responsibility on people living with HIV. Some provisions in the current bill are a positive step however: outlawing pre-employment HIV testing and allowing young people from the age of 16 to receive an HIV test without parental consent. In particular, the clause on non-discrimination in the work place has been a long standing demand by civil society and will, I am sure, be welcomed by many in Botswana.
More could be said about the bill and surely Botswana civil society will be making their voices heard in parliament and in the media. But what is most frustrating is that for all the laudable efforts by the government to devise a national HIV programme based on support, openness and availability of services (including anti-retroviral treatment), Botswana has consistently failed to create an enabling legal environment that supports human rights and ensures non-discrimination of people living with HIV.
The National AIDS Council (NAC) of Botswana received a comprehensive report on HIV and the law as far back as 2005. I was a member of the council at the time and still have vivid memories of the lengthy debates about necessary law reform that would help to remove some of the barriers to an effective HIV response. But the report was never acted on. Seven years later, a poorly drafted piece of legislation is being debated in parliament that will undermine a response based on respect, dignity and openness.
Last week in the UK, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law launched its report presenting a coherent and compelling evidence base on human rights and legal issues relating to HIV. Former president of Botswana and long serving chair of the Botswana National AIDS Council, Festus Mogae, was one of the high profile commissioners involved in the report. It is disheartening to think that such an ill informed and badly formulated bill is now being debated in Botswana under his watch and one can only hope that his political influence and wisdom will prevent it from being passed.
This recent episode is just another example of how the law is often not used to promote a legal environment that supports access to HIV services but rather creates an atmosphere of distrust and persecution, fuelled by stigmatising attitudes against people living with HIV. It is sad to think that 30 years into the epidemic we have still not embraced a culture of equity, empowerment and support. Debates such as the current one in Botswana’s parliament also remind us about the urgent need to continue supporting civil society even in relatively well resourced countries in order for them to play the watch dog role that is so desperately needed and to ensure that the public is given the democratic space to critically examine law reform processes.
What is needed is not more well meaning rhetoric about the importance of human rights at international level, but rather support to those on the ground that hold political actors accountable to translate such rhetoric into reality and in the best interest of those with less influence and voice.
Reagan AIDS Commission member, Dr Colleen Conway-Welch, recommends modernisation of US HIV-specific laws
“Most of the criminal laws were put into place in the early 90s because people were scared, and it would make sense to recommend that they go back,” said Dr Colleen Conway-Welch in a phone interview with The American Independent. “In medicine now, there is a real push for evidence-based interventions, and I think that for those laws that were not evidence-based, I think it would be time to go back.”
Conway-Welch’s statements are being received with praise by anti-criminalization advocates. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) — who has sponsored legislation that would encourage reform of state and federal HIV policies — said: “I’m very please she has taken this bold step to join us. It is a very important step. I look forward to working with her.”
Anti-Homosexuality Bill retains 'aggravated homosexuality' provision for men with HIV
Botswana Network on Ethics, Law and HIV/AIDS highlights problematic HIV provisions in "counter-productive, discriminatory, unconstitutional and barbaric" Public Health Bill
The Botswana Network on Ethics, Law and HIV/AIDS (BONELA), is shocked by the introduction of a Public Health Bill which our Parliament is currently debating. This Bill has some provisions that have no place in a democratic and modern day Botswana. It has provisions that are counter-productive, discriminatory, unconstitutional and barbaric.
US: Anti-criminalisation advocacy goes mainstream for World AIDS Day
World AIDS Day saw unprecedented media attention on advocacy against HIV criminalisation in the United States.
Following on from the flurry of media interest stemming from advocacy at the International AIDS Conference held in Washington DC this summer, including a major piece on CNN’s website, CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta interviewed Nick Rhoades and Robert Suttle.
In case the video disappears in the future: here’s the transcript.
Coming up, when sex, even consensual sex becomes a crime. We’ll explain.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GUPTA: This weekend marks World AIDS Day, and this weekend, we got some, what I would consider, extremely troubling news, perhaps surprising as well.
Listen to this closely: more than a quarter of all new HIV infections in this country are in 13 to 24-year-olds. And most of those young people don’t even know that they are infected.
Now, as you know, there’s always been secrecy around HIV/AIDS. But it also brings up a tough issue. More than half of the United States’ states have laws that make it a crime for people with HIV to not disclose it when they have sex. Now, some say that’s only fair, but others say making this crime not just scares people and keeps them from being tested or seeking care.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GUPTA (voice-over): Four years ago, Nick Rhoades, an HIV positive, 34- year-old, living in Iowa, met a younger man. They hit it off, and had sex.
NICK RHOADES, CONVICTED OF CRIMINAL TRANSMISSION OF HIV: My viral load is undetectable. I wore a condom. I did everything I could to protect him and myself.
GUPTA: What Rhoades didn’t do was tell his friend about having HIV. And when the friend out later, he sought treatment at a local hospital. And the hospital employee called the police.
Rhodes was arrested, charged with criminal transmission of HIV and after pleading guilty on the advice of his lawyer, he was sentenced to 25 years in prison.
RHOADES: I served over a year locked up, some of it in maximum security and some of it in solitary confinement. And I still have to register as a sex offender for the rest of my life. GUPTA: Scott Schoettes, an the attorney for Lambda Legal, is Rhoades new lawyer. He is asking the Iowa Supreme Court to overturn Rhoades conviction.
SCOTT SCHOETTES, HIV PROJECT DIRECTOR, LAMBDA LEGAL: This case in particular was compelling, it really was a good example of the ways in which these laws are misused by the justice system to punish people in very severe ways for things that should not even be crimes.
GUPTA: About a thousand miles away in Louisiana, a similar case.
Robert Suttle said his partner knew Suttle had HIV, but after a messy break-up, his ex went to the police. Suttle was charged of intentionally exposing the man to the AIDS virus.
ROBERT SUTTLE, CONVICTED OF INTENTIONAL EXPOSURE TO AIDS VIRUS: I was arrested at work and I was booked.
GUPTA: To avoid a possible 10-year sentence, Suttle entered a plea. And he spent six months in jail.
Under the picture on his driver’s license in bold red capital letters, it says “sex offender”. He has to carry that tag for 15 years.
SUTTLE: There are a lot of good people in the world that are HIV positive, but that doesn’t mean that they are criminals. It doesn’t mean they have malicious intent to hurt anybody. They’re just trying to deal and cope with having this disease. And yet, there’s these laws that make us look like we’re criminals.
GUPTA: At least 34 states and two U.S. territories have laws that criminalize activities of people with HIV. Not disclosing your status to a sexual partner, that can land you in jail. So can spitting on somebody or biting them if you have the disease.
Often, it doesn’t matter if you actually transmit the virus. In fact, the man that slept with Rhoades never got HIV.
REP. BARBARA LEE (D), CALIFORNIA: Jail time is not warranted in these cases.
GUPTA: Last year, Congresswoman Barbara Lee introduced legislation to get rid of these state laws.
LEE: Many offenses receive a lesser sentence than the transmission of HIV. And these laws, again, they’re archaic. They’re wrong. They are unjust. And they need to be looked at and taken off of the books.
GUPTA: Prosecutor Scott Burns agrees that the laws need updating, but he also says repeal would be a mistake.
SCOTT BURNS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION: Any time that someone knows they have HIV or AIDS doesn’t disclose that to the other party, I think, is wrong. I think there should be a sanction. I just don’t think you do that in America. And I think most prosecutors would agree with me. GUPTA: Rhoades and Suttle now work for the Sero Project. It’s a group that fights stigma and discrimination, trying to make the case that what happened to them should never happen to others.
SUTTLE: We cannot sit and ignore the fact that this is happening.
RHOADES: I have to fight for this, and I think there are a lot of people that are fighting, as well.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GUPTA: Now, I should say the accuser in Nick’s case didn’t want to talk to us. And the identity of Robert’s accuser is sealed as well by court order.
In addition, a local Iowa TV station, KWWL, in the county where Nick Rhoades was prosecuted, led with this fantastic interview with Tami Haught from CHAIN (Community HIV/Hepatitis Advocates of Iowa Network), who is leading Iowa’s campaign to modernize the HIV criminalization law.
Finally, yesterday saw the US National Dialogue on the Criminalization of HIV Transmission, Exposure and Non-disclosure: The role of the States and the Federal Government, on Capitol Hill in Washington DC. I’m sure there will be more written about this, but I’m including below a collection of all the tweets and images created live to give you an idea of the richness of the conversation, who was there, and who wasn’t. Thanks especially to Darby Hickey for summarising the dialogue so well.