Despite the opposition, on May 12th, 2014, the Ugandan Parliament passed the HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Bill (HIV Bill). Civil society had urged President Museveni to reject the bill, but on July 31st, he assented the bill. Some allege political motivation to this decision: Kikonyongo Kivumbi of the Uganda Health and Science Press Association remarked the presidential assent as a “populist act” highly influenced by the agenda “of the US republican right”. Others regard the law successful in competing intentional transmission. A member of the Ugandan Parliament, Chris Maryomunsi, argued that Kenya had passed a similar law that reduced infection rates. Yet, even in Kenya, the HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act has been declared as unconstitutional and it is taking steps to reverse criminalization laws.
The lethal and destructive effects of penalizing HIV transmission was seen in the May 2014 case of Rosemary Namubiru’s. Under Section 171 of Ugandan Penal Code Act, Rosemary Namubiru, a nurse at a public hospital in Kampala, who was living with HIV, was accused for spreading the infection of any disease dangerous to life unlawfully, when she treated a two-year-old boy with the same needle that she had pricked herself with and drawn blood. Even though Rosemary defended her innocence, she was given seven years jail time. The issue of intentionality remained at the core of the decision. She appealed her conviction to the High Court of Uganda, where the Court reduced the earlier ruling of the trial court sentence to time served, five months. The High Court still found sufficient criminal negligence, provided her 30 years in this profession but due to her old age, HIV status, greater degree of legal protection upon medical professionals and that the boy had not contracted HIV, her sentence was reduced.
Although the full legal procedure ultimately diminished her jail time, it destroyed her dignity as a human being labeling her as “killer nurse” in both national and international media coverage. The implications for people living with HIV and AIDS goes a further step. This case paints a demonizing image of them, as people with malicious incentives to cause danger to society, as criminals.
The recently passed HIV Bill puts those implications into words by adding the language of “intentionality” and it will only aggravate the stigma that surrounds those living with HIV. There is increasing evidence that such laws will deter people from getting tested and accessing treatment due to fear of prosecution. In a patriarchal society such as Uganda, where more women are tested positive, 8.3 percent of women and 6.1 percent of men, women are more likely to face higher societal and economic risks when facing public trials or personal health information disclosures. The bill, as some NGOs have pointed out, “will impede the fight against AIDS”. For a country that has successively combatted HIV/AIDS for decades, this criminalization of the disease calls for concern as it could undo its accomplishments and worsen the lives of the already vulnerable population.
