 Other Sheep eNews March 13, 2009
|
|
 |
|
by Zaharadeen Gambo, Program Officer of Global Rights
|
"Christian Fundamentalists" vs. Civil Society Organizations
Analysis of Public Hearing on Nigeria
Same Gender Marriage (Prohibition) Bill 2008
Held at the National Assembly
Complex, Abuja, March 11, 2009
|
|
Dear Other Sheep Reader,
Diana Sands, LGBT Program Associate of the Unitarian Universalist UN Office in New York City, forwarded to Other Sheep this Analysis by Zaharadeen Gambo, Program Officer of Global Rights. You can email Gambo at zaharadeeng@globalrights.org. Please pass on this report -- or whatever other report you may have received -- to others. Sincerely, Steve Parelli, MDiv Other Sheep Executive Director PS Here's a resource -- Religious Freedom and Gay Marriage: A paper I presented to the Evangelical Theological Society, November 2006.
|
|
 |
A Public Hearing on the Nigerian Same Gender Marriage Bill
|
|
Held March 11, 2009, at the National Assembly Complex in Abuja
|
|
About 250 Participants
The public hearing
on the Same Gender Marriage Bill which was proposed by the Nigerian House of
Representatives and voted on second reading by the House on 15th
January 2009 was held yesterday the 11th of March 2009 at the
National Assembly Complex in Abuja.
The public hearing was attended by a number of about 250 participants including
members of the House of Representatives, House committee members and other
representatives of Nigerian Civil Society Organizations, Religious groups,
international organizations, diplomatic missions and the media.
|
|
A Battle between human rights societies and Christian fundamentalists
|
A battle between human rights and Christian fundamentalists
Homosexuality is evil, demonic and un-African
Any man who sleeps with another man has "two heads."
Lack of inclusion of different ideological, ethnic and religious groups
|
|
Ignorant and insulting statements made against homosexuals
From the point of
view of human rights, humanity and democracy the public hearing was a total
mockery and total lack of federal character, respect for human rights and
ethics of democracy. The public hearing can rightly be analyzed as a staggering
battle between the civil society organizations that were there to protect and
promote human rights and Christian fundamentalists who were obviously there to
preach their ideological and religious beliefs. There was absolute lack of
representation from cross-cutting groups, communities and other traditional and
religious representation that form the diverse ethic and religious democratic
nation known as 'Nigeria'.
One can rightly assert that the public hearing was a total humiliation and
means of openly declaring to the sexual minorities, the LGBT community and
civil society organizations opposing the proposed bill the hatred that is
targeted against them.
It was very obvious
that the public hearing was also meant as a medium to embarrass members of
civil society organizations and individuals who are against the introduction of
the Same Gender Marriage (Prohibition) Bill 2008. Members of the house, who spoke their opinion
on the proposed bill, expressed their will to support the bill, because according
to most of them, homosexuality is evil, demonic and un-African, and therefore
there should be more severe punishment for homosexuals by means of hanging to
death. It was evident that there was an intended collaboration between the
members of the house and the Christian clergies at the hearing to frustrate and
embarrass members of civil society and other individuals who spoke at the
hearing against the bill. There were instances when participants in support of
the bill would boo and make insulting comments after a presentation by
individuals and organizations who speak against the bill. In fact the hearing
was an abject humiliation especially to participants who were there to exercise
their rights as citizens of Nigeria
and as members of civil society who were there to promote human rights and democracy.
Other insulting
remarks made by the members of the house included those on the question of
whether homosexuality is a disease and could be cured. One member of the house
in his remark stated that his forefathers had told him that any man who sleeps
with another man would have "two heads".
There were lots of other ignorant and insulting statements made by the
members, all with the obvious intention of shaming any individual or
organization that was at the hearing to speak against the proposed bill. In addition, members of the house openly
expressed their willingness to sign for the approval of the bill.
In the words of some
participants from civil society organizations, the public hearing lacked proper
organization and they also expressed their concern about the bias nature of
response from the members of the house at the hearing. Civil society
participants also expressed concern about the level of hypocrisy from the
members of the house on general issues of sexuality, same sex and human rights.
Civil society participants noted the paramount need for educating members of
the house on issues of sexuality and human rights.
Evidence of lack of
inclusion of different ideological, ethnic and religious groups was very
glaring considering the fact that opening and closing prayers were according to
federal character supposed to be conducted by a Muslim and Christian. However,
the opening and closing prayers were completely conducted by Christians. First
and foremost the opening prayer was conducted by a Christian participant, and
thereafter a remark from the representative of the Director of the human rights
commission, who only spoke for less than a minute, without passing any relevant
information that would enhance participation and stress the important of the
hearing in promoting human rights.
The Minister of
Women Affairs, who is presently in New
York to attend a program on maternal mortality, was
represented by other person who could only tell participants at the hearing
that there are limits to certain rights especially those that constitutes moral
discuss and societal values. The Ministry therefore urged participants to take
cognizance of the provisions of the constitution in their deliberation at the
hearing. It is surprising therefore that there was no encouragement from the
Ministry of Women Affairs on the protection and promotion human rights especially
on a controversial issues that could open further discuss on gender and
sexuality in a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural nation like
Nigeria.
|
|
Key questions to ask
regarding the conduct of the Public Hearing
|
Over 200 ethnic groups and different religious beliefs in Nigeria
No representation from the Islamic groups
What is the motive behind the bill?
All citizens must be heard and respected
|
|
A democratic government must represent all its people
First and foremost as mentioned earlier there was no adequate
representation from other groups and communities especially from religious
groups, cultural and traditional groups. The public hearing was mainly an
opinion discuss from the religious perspective and the point of view of human
rights which was proffered by civil society organizations. There is an alarming
concern that for the lack of inclusion at the public hearing, it may result in
ethnic/religious conflict. This is feared because there are over 200 ethnic
groups and different religious beliefs in the country, and in the traditions of
some of these ethnic groups there is a history and recognition of same gender
relationships and marriages. One would then ask how the proposed bill would
affect those cultures, traditions and beliefs.
It was a total surprise that there was no representation from
the Islamic groups in the country. The members of the House had mentioned that
a letter of invitation was sent to the Sultan of Sokoto and other Islamic
groups, but why was there no single representation from any Islamic group or
association. For this question one can rightly speculate if the bill is
specifically a "Christian Fundamentalist" Bill.
The fact that the public hearing was not properly organized,
and did not have inclusive participation from all and sundry leaves us with the
question of whether Same Gender Marriage is really an important issue that
Nigerians want to discuss. Is the bill really necessary? Was it just an
initiative from certain members of the House who has a personal motive for the
introduction of such a bill? Could the bill be a politically motivated
initiative to ridicule political opponents? The questions may be endless!!!
These questions leaves us with the most likely speculation,
which is the fact that the Nigerian National Assembly must ensure that it puts
all issues into consideration, especially with a view to protecting and
promoting human rights of all in a multi-ethnic, multi-religious,
multi-cultural nation such as Nigeria. The National Assembly is also obliged to
hear, respect, and recognize the opinion of all citizens, because democracy is
a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
May we also remind the members of the Nigerian National
Assembly and others advocating for the approval of the bill that there is
sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing - the
last of human freedoms, to choose one's attitude in any given set of
circumstances, to choose one's own way.
|
|
Some recommendations on
means and ways of advocacy against the proposed Bill
|
2006 bill killed
We can only speculate on what kind of decisions the House committees and its members will make
What do we do?
|
|
We must not relent in our efforts for the civil rights of all
There is no doubt that despite all efforts to scuttle the
participation of the few civil society organizations who are advocating against
the proposed bill, the effect of their activism and courage has been very
overwhelming.
In 2006, when the Same Sex Marriage prohibition bill was
introduced at the House, civil society mobilization and contribution at the
public hearing provided a sufficient proof that a cross-cutting participation
from LGBT organizations and mainstream human rights NGOs and activists gave a
strong background to the advocacy effort that killed the proposed bill.
The same method of mobilization was used for the public
hearing on the Same Gender Marriage (Prohibition) Bill 2008, which like in 2006
provided the opportunity and inclusion for members of civil society
organizations and activist to express their concern and give analysis of the
human rights implications of the same gender marriage legislation. Although the hearing has already been
conducted, and we can only speculate on what kind of decisions the House
committees and its members would take on the Bill, we should not relent in our
effort at using every medium we could to express our concerns and advocate for
the recognition of human rights irrespective of sex, gender, sexual orientation,
gender identity and expression. For this purpose, I would recommend the
following:
- Keep
mobilizing other mainstream civil society organization to join the
membership of the Coalition and advocate against the bill.
- Find
means and ways of lobbying members of the National Assembly and providing
educative and enlightening information to them on sexuality and human rights.
- Embark
on continuous research and findings on sexuality, same sex
relationships/marriages with reference to biologically proven realities
and on the other hand on cultural and traditional realities of the
Nigerian societies.
|
|
The Urgent need for the
intervention of International Organizations, Embassies, Missions, other allies,
concerned individuals and groups
|
No statements from the international community were read at the March 11 hearing
The damage this bill will do if made law
|
|
Help us stop this draconian, anti-human rights and un-democratic legislation
The effort to kill the bill in 2006 was indeed made
successful by the enormous and valuable contributions made by international
organizations, embassies, missions and different groups and individuals who
share the same concern with the Nigerian civil society organizations and LGBT
activists on the Bill.
For the purpose of the public hearing organized by the house
yesterday, no statements from international organizations were read, although
we have submitted some memorandums from Amnesty International, Global Rights
and Human Rights Watch, which we believe the house would examine.
We would at this moment call upon our friends and colleagues
from international organizations, Embassies, Missions and other concerned
groups to please go ahead as they did in 2006 to send their concerns against
the Same Gender Marriage (Prohibition) 2008 to the Nigerian House of Assembly
and other relevant government agencies.
As already mentioned the implications of the bill does not
only affect Nigerians alone, but also Non-Nigerians who are in Nigeria or
intending to come into the country. We are also aware of the damage the bill
could do to international relations between Nigeria and other countries of the
world. These implications are only among the few we are anticipating, but more
implications with severe consequences may manifest if the bill is approved by
the Nigerian National Assembly.
Please let us put all efforts and stop this draconian,
anti-human rights and un-democratic legislation.
_______________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
