My honest opinion, and I will accept chastisement for my ignorance, isthat homosexual Kenyans are far safer, far far safer with thegovernment than they are with the Kenyan public.
This is one of thoseissues like the Mau debate, or caning in schools, or the death penaltywhere the state will be more likely to defend and protect human rightsthan the public, the media or even civil society leadership will be tosue for it.
So, much as I am suspicious of the idea of a census and of its timing, I can see no reason for fear of the State. The Kenyan state does not,it seems to me, have a systematic beef with homosexuals. We do not haveKenyans frequently arraigned in courts on such charges, and neither dothere seem to be reports of particular discrimination say in governmentoffices. I see as much more plausible, the suggestion put forward bysome that this as an attempt by the National Aids/STD ControlProgramme (NASCOP) to compete for funding, one likely promoted by thisboard independently, without coordination or even consent from otherparts of the government. More, this is not cause for worry, but forcelebration.
The consequences of this census are likely to be positive. First, Ithink it unlikely the state, or at least this board, is hoping for apoorly result. They are more likely to want a large count, a resultthat justifies demands for more money from donors and even a largerportion of Ministry of Health funding. Also, as I said before, theredoes not seem to be an institutional beef on the part of the Kenyanstate against homosexuals. This suggests to me that the census will becarried out with some measure of tact and sensitivity. Incriminatingquestioning, disregard for requests of anonymity, aggression, foul,moralising language or insufficiently discreet methods are unlikely tohelp NASCOP's agenda much, so we can bet against such tactics. Indeed,the very success of the plan at NASCOP has gay and lesbian Kenyans asthe target market for this product, I believe they will try to sell itwell.
What this census means, the most important development here, is thatthe Kenyan state now acknowledges homosexuality, and is prepared todeal with it as a fact with no judgement, at least not in the newsstatements from NASCOP, of its morality. Whether individual players inthe government consider homosexuality unAfrican , or a sin worthy ofdeath and hellfire is immaterial here. This, after all is not a surveyby the ministry of Justice, African Morality and Constitutional Affairsor by the Ministry of Culture and Social Purity.
To iterate, the very fact of this census is a matter for celebration.If any money is coming to the Kenyan state specifically targeted athomosexuals, then the state will be obliged to abide by certainguidelines, to play by certain rules if that funding is to keep coming,even to increase in its volume. Even if this is not the intention ofthe state, the corollary of this tacit acceptance will be that medicalpersonnel, human resources personnel, educators, the police, courts,etc will be compelled to receive certain training, and comply withcertain guidelines that extend from this reality and that will be anecessary part of any health spend.
More to the point, ideologically perhaps, the state really ought to becharged with supplying healthcare solutions to its citizens, all ofthem, without discrimination. No one should have to deal with an NGO nomatter how kindly because the state is denying him what is his byright. Any step toward this reform away from seclusion must first dealwith the fact of existence of such a group, and a measuring of themagnitude of the population of the excluded.
By the way, homosexuality is not illegal in Kenya, is it?
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
