STILL ON THE ANTI-GAY MARRIAGES BILL (1)

Joseph Daodu, President, NBA
Is the NBA against Senate Bill 05?

“One is therefore fully persuaded that this is an issue about which everyone who has any kind of claim to leadership in Nigeria should take a stand, clearly and unambiguously. This is because certain individuals and institutions have powerful opinion moulding capabilities, and are therefore able to influence society for good or for ill."

In How Cameron Can Help Nigeria’s Anti-Gay Marriage Bill (November 3, 2011), I made the point that Senate Bill 05 otherwise known as “An Act to Prohibit Same Sex Marriages”, has a very good chance of pulling through, thanks to the bully tactics of David Cameron’s government.

My argument was that in its brazenness and its timing, the threat by Cameron to withhold budget support aid from African nations who do not legalise homosexuality, and the backlash can only help the bill. At this point, I wrote “not even the motley crowd of ‘politically correct’ foreign grant dependent Nigerian human rights and civil liberties activists, usually mobilised by Amnesty International”, can afford to be seen as anything but nationalists.

Since that piece some readers have wondered about my characterisation of some NGOs as “the motley crowd of ‘politically correct’ foreign grant dependent Nigerian human rights and civil liberties activists, usually mobilised by Amnesty International.” It is in direct response to this class of readers that I return to this subject today.

In returning to the subject, I shall be quoting from an earlier article on the subject, “Who’s who Against HB150” (April 12, 2009). It was written in the heat of the debate on “A Bill for an Act to Prohibit Marriage between Persons of Same Gender, Solemnization of Same and for other Matters related therewith” in 2009, sponsored by 49 members of the House including the current Deputy Speaker, Emeka Ihedioha. That bill, as I pointed out two weeks ago, simply fizzled out right after the public hearing; a same fate suffered by an earlier executive bill, Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Bill, 2006, presented by the then Obasanjo administration.  This was why I warned that “proponents of the bill, particularly the church should go to sleep. We need to step hard on the throttle and get the bill fast-tracked before momentum is lost.”

A brief backgrounder is in order here. When House Bill 150 went for public hearing, Amnesty International wrote a memorandum, dated January 26, 2009, strongly opposing it, arguing that same-sex attraction was a human right that must be protected, not criminalised. That of course did not surprise any close watcher of that international body’s position on the subject globally. What surprised, even shocked many, including yours sincerely, was the long list of Nigeria-based and Nigerian-run NGOs listed as co-signatories to the pro gay-marriage memorandum. 

On that list were such NGOs as: Centre for Democracy & Development, (CDD); Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development (CEHRD); Centre for Law Enforcement Education (CLEEN Foundation); Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO), Nigeria; Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), Nigeria; and Human Rights Law Service (HURILAWS). Human Rights Monitor (HRM); International Centre for Reproductive Health and Sexual Rights (INCRESE); Legal Defence and Assistance Project (LEDAP) and Legal Resources Consortium (LRC).

Others are: Nigerian Humanist Movement; Partnership for Justice (PJ); Prisoners Rehabilitation and Welfare Action (PRAWA); Socio-Economic Rights & Accountability Project (SERAP); The Independent Project for Equal Rights; Women Advocates Research and Documentation Centre (WARDC); Girls' Power Initiative (GPI); House of Rainbow Metropolitan (HRMCC) and Youths 2gether Network.

The shock became even deeper when, a little online check revealed those connected with these NGOs, and who are at least vicariously, linked to the gay marriage support campaign.

I made the point then and I wish to reiterate that “…in a free country like ours, the right to support or refuse to support any bill before the National Assembly is inalienable. So also is the right to be indifferent. But it would be unfortunate, wouldn’t it, if one were to be associated with a position on any issue merely by default…”

And as I stated then, the gay issue wasn’t just any issue. It was and remains one “that’s capable of defining the very future of mankind! No matter how exaggerated it may seem to the liberal sensibilities of many of us, the truth is, as marriage goes, so goes the culture, and the future of the human race. At its most basic is the rhetorical question the Guardian newspaper raised in its editorial on the subject: ‘Homosexuals are claiming that men can marry themselves. If everyone followed their example, would they have even been born?’” 

Continuing, I wrote: “One is therefore fully persuaded that this is an issue about which everyone who has any kind of claim to leadership in Nigeria should take a stand, clearly and unambiguously. This is because certain individuals and institutions have powerful opinion moulding capabilities, and are therefore able to influence society for good or for ill.

"Interestingly, some of these role models who, in my opinion, have discharged themselves creditably for the public good, are being linked to pro-same-sex marriage approval, through some organisations they are connected with. A check on the antecedents of the NGOs said to be standing with Amnesty against HB 150 would probably lead you to join me in wondering if there hasn’t been a mistake somewhere.

Space will permit me to close-up on only one of them today, The Nigerian Bar Association, listed through its Human Rights Institute. Established “to promote and protect the rule of law, independence of the legal profession effectively and efficiently, and to advance human rights enforcement in Nigeria,” NBA–HRI’s membership is “open to all legal practitioners and law firms in Nigeria interested in pursuing the objects of the institute…”

Although this membership clause suggests that a legal practitioner can belong to the NBA without being a member of the institute, the question that arises is does the institute speak for the NBA? I would be surprised if there are many right-thinking members of the public who would hold otherwise.  Would it therefore not be right to conclude that Nigerian lawyers, a preponderance of whom would claim to subscribe to Christianity or Islam, support the Amnesty International statement that is clearly saying that homosexuality is a human right? I think not. Yet if the NBA or, at least, Association of Christian Lawyers has dissociated itself from this position, I am unaware of it! (CONTINUES).