ILGA State Sponsored Homophobia Report – The Aid Conditionality Question
Last month, ILGA (International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association) released the 2014 State Sponsored Homophobia Report. You can read the report here.
This report is a world survey of laws that critically looks at criminalisation, protection and recognition of same-sex love.
In the article, “We Are All African” (Page 78) I note;
But perhaps what could be seen as the most controversial of the responses sought would be aid conditionality. In October 2011, during the Commonwealth Meeting of Heads of State, David Cameron, the UK Prime Minister, threatened to reduce development aid to countries that criminalise homosexuality. Shortly after the statement was made, the United States also announced that they would use all available mechanisms, including measures related to development cooperation, to promote the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons. In February this year, the World Bank postponed a US$90 million loan due to the signing of the Anti-Homosexuality Act. Norway said it would be withholding $8m in development aid to Uganda, and Denmark will divert $9m away from the Ugandan government saying that they couldn’t distance themselves too strongly from the law and the signal that the Ugandan government now sends to not only persecuted minority groups, but to the whole world. Austria said it was reviewing its assistance to Uganda.
What are your thoughts on aid conditionality, particularly when the aid is tied to sexual orientation and gender identity?
watch this debate : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4QtWsNzO6c
It's long (one hour and a half) and it's not just about ILGA rights. But towards the middle, there are some strong statements : Sweden stopped aid to Uganda. It did not change a thing
watch : http://www.thelocal.se/20140305/sweden-stops-aid-to-anti-gay-uganda and read the comments
very very difficult to make a valid point here
Watching the debate…it's an interesting way to look at it all…and you are right. It is very difficult to make a valid point. I still think though that there is need to have a conversation about it. What are the gains made from aid conditionality? What human rights gains could be lost through aid conditionality? (And I realize I am making a very biased argument here so…) Isn't aid conditionality simply a way to push a country's/organization's agenda on the aid recipient? It certainly could be construed as such by the citizens of said recipient.