Blog Details

In a ruling that has drawn sharp criticism from human rights advocates, Uganda's Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal challenging the 2012 closure of an LGBTQ advocacy workshop, reinforcing limitations on freedoms of expression, association, and assembly for the community. The decision, delivered by Justices Christopher Gashirabake, Oscar John Kihika, and Byaruhanga Jesse Rugyema, upholds the High Court's 2014 finding that the shutdown was justified in the public interest to protect moral standards. The ruling upholds the judicial stance of criminalizing everyday advocacy and skills-building efforts.

The case originated from a February 14, 2012, incident at the Imperial Resort Beach Hotel in Entebbe, where Rev. Fr. Simon Lokodo, then Minister for Ethics and Integrity, intervened in a workshop organized by Freedom and Roam Uganda (FARUG). Attendees, including appellants Jacqueline Kasha Nabagesera, Frank Mugisha, Julian Pepe Onziema, and Geoffrey Ogwaro, described the event as a peaceful session on leadership, project planning, human rights, and advocacy skills. However, Lokodo, citing investigations into FARUG and Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), alleged it promoted same-sex practices, which are outlawed under Section 145 of the Penal Code Act as “unnatural offenses.”

A Workshop That Sparked a 14-Year Legal Battle

The case stems from an incident on February 14, 2012, at the Imperial Resort Beach Hotel in Entebbe. Rev. Fr. Simon Lokodo, then Minister for Ethics and Integrity, ordered the closure of a workshop organised by Freedom and Roam Uganda (FARUG).

The High Court, under Justice Stephen Musota in 2014, ruled the closure justified to protect moral values. The appellants appealed arguing that the trial judge improperly resolved criminal allegations via affidavit evidence, relied on speculation, and transformed a human rights enforcement application into a criminal trial. Justice Byaruhanga Jesse Rugyema, with concurrences from Justices Oscar John Kihika and Christopher Gashirabake, rejected claims of rights violations under Articles 21 (equality), 29(1)(a) and (d) (expression and assembly), and 38(2) (civic participation) of the 1995 Constitution. The court emphasized the workshop's “clandestine nature” and materials linked to international LGBTQ groups concluding it encouraged prohibited activities.

 Advocacy and Skills Training Now Face Legal Risk

In practical terms, this means gatherings focused on empowering LGBTQ individuals such as workshops on leadership or rights advocacy risk being labelled as criminal, exposing participants to arrests, shutdowns, or worse. It aligns with the broader enforcement of the 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act, which imposes severe penalties, including life imprisonment or death for “aggravated homosexuality” and has fuelled a climate of fear, evictions, and violence.

 Rights Advocates Condemn the Ruling

Mwebaza, the executive director of the Human Rights Awareness and Promotion Forum (HRAPF), which represented the appellants, described the ruling as very unfortunate and biased. He accused the judiciary of adopting a “moralistic approach” based on personal opinions rather than legal and human rights principles, citing similar trends in cases like the SMUG registration appeal and abortion law challenges.  “If judges are also siding with those in the High Court, this shows that this is not really for the benefit of human rights. It is a detriment to the rights that we have so long supported, which the Constitution itself has guaranteed to Ugandans,” he added. He warned that imposing costs on petitioners is meant to curb efforts to defend and promote human rights efforts. “That is to stop them from filing further cases, and intimidate people from using those courts to get redress on issues of human rights violations in certain communities, like LGBTQ persons,” he said.

Undeterred, Mwebaza has called for continued resistance, urging fairness and protection of constitutional guarantees. “The best thing to do is to continue challenging it at the Supreme Court level,” he said, adding that if domestic remedies fail, they would seek justice at regional bodies like the East African Court or UN mechanisms. He emphasized the ruling's broader message: “You cannot conduct activities, you cannot organise... you cannot resolve issues by holding conversations around issues affecting you, or even building schools, training people in economic empowerment.”

   Part of a Broader Legal Pattern

 The Court of Appeal decision mirrors earlier judicial positions suggesting that LGBTQ rights to expression and assembly can be limited under existing criminal laws  in the penal code and the Anti-Homosexuality Act. The AHA remains in force after Uganda’s Constitutional Court declined to nullify it in April 2024. with rights advocates appealing the decision to the Supreme Court.  It suggests that skills training or advocacy events could be deemed incitement or conspiracy to commit offenses, or “promotion of homosexuality” under the AHA. Analysts warn that advocacy workshops, community trainings, or even economic empowerment programs could be interpreted as incitement, conspiracy, or “promotion of homosexuality” under the law.

A Warning Signal for Civic Space

While the ruling brings closure to a 14-year legal battle, its impact extends far beyond the individuals involved. Human rights defenders say it signals a widening legal and social environment where organising, dialogue, and community empowerment efforts face growing risk.For many advocates, the decision underscores an urgent reality: the struggle for equality, civic participation, and constitutional protection in Uganda is far from over.While the ruling ends this 14-year saga, unless appealed to the Supreme Court, it signals to advocates that their work remains under threat.