I must confess, I am a strong supporter and member of MFC (Mogae Fan Club). I am however, not a blind follower. Former President Mogae (Mo-High) has recently been on song calling for decriminalization of sodomy in the country and in support of his statements claims he is now converted. I am puzzled and I do not know what to make out of his conversion.
The Global Commission on HIV/AIDS and Law has in the past years started conversations that are often perceived as a taboo and highly sensitive in African culture and custom. They called for explicit decriminalization of sodomy and have shown sympathy to Men who have sex with other Men. Spearheading the initiative in Africa is the “Champions of HIV/AIDS, with former president Festus G Mogae responsible for the Botswana chapter. In 2011 Festus Mogae shocked the nation when he first presented the views of the Global Commission on HIV/AIDS and Law at NAC meeting. Many people were left in a state of shock because culturally issues of sodomy and commercial sex work are looked at with great disgust and shame. Unfortunately even Mogae was not quite convincing especially with regard to the reasons he advanced by calling for decriminalization of sodomy and voluntary sex work. Mogae stated he was now comfortable to advocate for decriminalization of sex work and gays, something he could not risk doing during his tenure in office; he could not have afforded to lose elections “just for gays,” he said.
It must be noted that, in his interview with Omar Ben Yedder in 2010, Mogae stated he was now free to say things that he would have never said as President because (as president) there would be political implications. It is clear that during his tenure in office Mogae did not advocate for gay rights. Mogae maintains that he instead put his political career ahead of gays. By his own admission he stated that ‘I was not willing to lose elections on behalf of the gays’, Mail &Guardian, 14th March 2011. In responding to Mogae’s comments, one Eusebius McKaiser remarked that he found ‘Mogae’s attitude deeply immoral’. To which Mogae defended his actions on the basis that he ruled in a democracy and could only do what was acceptable to the majority, Mail Guardian 14th March 2011. However, now that he is no longer the President, he has nothing to lose and can freely and openly say things he would have never said as the President. The late Log Raditlhokwa in Mid-week Sun of the 19th October 2011 describes Mogae’s actions as carnally minded and not being spiritually sensitive. However, it must be appreciated and acknowledged that whilst Mogae has been calling for decriminalization of homosexuals and legalization of prostitution, he does not operate in a vacuum.
Different people have presented their different viewpoints regarding the above subject matter, others for and against. Others have argued their points based on moral grounds and culture with some critics stating that ‘We refuse to emulate nations that have no fear of the Lord. After corrupting their own people, agents from these countries crisscross the world deceiving gullible organizations like BONELA and national leaders to encourage people to succumb to the schemes of the enemy’ Midweek Sun 20/10/2011. For his part Peter Siele has been quoted in Botswana Gazette 23rd February 2011 as having said ‘As a parent it was difficult for me to talk about legitimizing such acts (gays). I would find it difficult to go around Kgotla meeting advocating for the legitimization of such things.’
It is a well known fact that there have been recent calls for the adoption and acceptance for global appetite to sodomize nation states through the introduction of global health care reforms and agenda settings. It is thus very important to give a background of where Mogae’s actions are coming from. Towards the end of the millennium, there emerged widespread recognition that a variety of processes often taking the short hand of Globalization reconstituted and intensified both the risks of ill-health and opportunities for addressing them. This recognition was accompanied by concern that existing institutional arrangements were not only increasingly constrained from addressing risks, but also from taking advantage of emerging opportunities. New organizations and networks thus were formed to address global health issues and new ways of delivering health services and strengthening health systems. This dynamic environment constitutes what is called global health governance.
The proliferation of the new global health actors means there are many different bodies involved in quite similar activities both at global and national levels and many a times this being used as a platform to siphon resources from funders especially in less developed countries. It has been observed that this can result in duplication and even conflict in terms of the approaches they advocate or the activities that they are willing to fund or support. One such highly contested domain is on the health intervention treatment and prevention campaigns developed towards fighting HIV/AIDS such as the Safe Male Circumcision Project, Sexual and Reproductive health amongst the many others and now a shift in the global health financing architecture from infectious diseases to non infectious diseases, just to give an example.
There has also been mushrooming of International Non Governmental Organizations in many less developed countries doing same projects thus competing for funds and research participants in some instances. For many, the proliferation of new global health actors and shifts in the relative importance and roles of existing actors is to be welcomed. For others, this multitude of diverse actors and networks indicates continuing and growing fragmentation and chaos at global and national levels.
It is still fresh in my mind why President Robert Mugabe once called David Cameron satanic for backing gays and said that homosexuals were worse than pigs and dogs. In Malawi a gay couple was jailed after getting engaged. Recently in Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni signed the controversial law against homosexuals comprising the entire LGBT community, justifying his choice as a necessary act to stop an unnatural preference. In Botswana, the government is reluctant to open up on the issue of LGBT.
In any case, I am not gay and I do not know have anything about gays. I am neither a converted hypocrite. I am a heterosexual, I look at women. I don’t look at other men. But I have come to accept that there are men who look at other men.
Thabo Lucas Seleke is a Researcher in Health Policy & Health Systems Strengthening
