Connect with us

After UN Vote Allowing Gay Execution, South Africa Bears Brunt Of Backlash

Published

on

Two weeks ago, African nations led a charge successfully removing “sexual orientation” from a United Nations resolution protecting persons from extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. Now, South Africa, once seen as a refuge for LGBT equality on the African continent, is feeling the brunt of the backlash against its complicity in the blatantly discriminatory vote against gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people.

South African human rights groups and a major opposition political party have publicly castigated the government of South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma for its successful vote and leadership of Southern African countries in the UN General Assembly to remove protection of gays from extrajudicial and summary killings two weeks ago.

For further analysis into this story, read Tanya Domi’s piece, “UN Vote Allowing Gays To Be Executed Result Of Political, Religious Fundamentalism.”

Human rights groups, led by the Centre for Law and Social Justice, have written an open letter to the government of South Africa, asserting that that it has “violated [the] constitution [by its vote] at the UN and is complicit in execution of LGBTI people.”

The Centre’s letter, currently open for signatures, strongly criticizes the foreign policy of the governing African National Congress (ANC) government, alleging that it has “once again violated our constitution and the judgements of the constitutional court.  The government is now complicit in the criminalisation of people on the basis of their sexual orientation and allowing the death penalty against LGBTI people.”  The letter will be presented to the Zuma government on December 10th, International Human Rights Day.

The Democratic Alliance, a major progressive opposition party to the ANC, published a letter last week addressed to Maite Nkoane-Mashabe, the minister of  International Relations and Cooperation, about the vote that “makes a mockery of our constitution, which is widely regarded as one of the most progressive in the world (the only constitution in the world that includes sexual orientation as a protected class.)”  The Alliance said the government’s vote had aligned South Africa with the likes of Iran, Nigeria, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, Sudan and Saudi Arabia, states that carry the death penalty for consensual sex between adults of the same sex.

The letter, signed by Kenneth Mubu, a member of parliament and the Alliance’s Shadow Minister for International Relations and Cooperation, also expressed disappointment,

for South Africa to be among the 79 states which voted to have the amendment to this resolution passed.  The explanation for this vote offered by South Africa’s UN representative–that the international law is”insufficiently clear on the definition of sexual orientation, according to the official UN minutes–is patently ridiculous.

We have voted to weaken the international community’s response to extrajudicial killings based upon sexual orientation…South Africa should be leading the way in promoting LGBT rights on the African continent, and further afield.  Our foreign policy should set an example.  Instead, we are voting with states that publicly flog and execute their own citizens.

Once considered the human rights leader on the African continent, during the past fifteen years South Africa has steadily forsaken the legacy of former president Nelson Mandela, who promised South Africa and the world in 1994 that “human rights will be the light that guides our foreign affairs.”

Born and raised in South Africa, Clinton Fein, a San Francisco based LGBT activist and First Amendment advocate-artist, said that “Nelson Mandela must be appalled by the South African government’s UNGA vote” and called it “crazy.”

“To have a constitution that specifically prohibits discrimination based upon sexual orientation,” Fein said, “and for them [the government] to vote against [gays] is mind boggling. You would hope South Africa would be a leader–but they are going backwards, instead of forwards.”

The Democratic Alliance and human rights groups questioned the LGBT policies of the Zuma government, including UN representation by Ambassador Baso Sangu and the recent appointment of Jon Qwelane to be South Africa’s ambassador to Uganda, who is well known for his homophobic attitudes. During his campaign for president last year, Zuma bragged that “when he was growing up, an “ungqingili” (homosexual) would not have stood in front of me.  I would knock him out.”

Sadly, for South Africa, the continent and the world, without the political and moral leadership of Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, two giant figures in South Africa’s journey from apartheid to freedom, it has chosen the low road by actively working against respect for LGBT human rights in its foreign policy.  Instead of being a leader for human rights, it has joined with pariah states who execute homosexuals, without cause. For those South Africans who embrace Nelson Mandela’s belief that human rights would light its foreign policy, and share Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s belief that hate has no place in religion or in the public square,  they have a real fight on their hands.

UPDATE: Protests against the United Nations General Assembly vote will take place in San Francisco and New York City, December 10-11.  For more detailed information see the Petrelis Files.

Tanya L. Domi is an Adjunct Assistant Professor of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University, who teaches about human rights in Eurasia and is a Harriman Institute affiliated faculty member. Prior to teaching at Columbia, Domi worked internationally for more than a decade on issues related to democratic transitional development, including political and media development, human rights, gender issues, sex trafficking, and media freedom.

Image: South Africa’s Coat of Arms, launched on “Freedom Day,” 27 April 2000.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

DOJ Blasted for Taking Epstein Investigation Orders From Trump

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 14, 2025

By

Attorney General Pam Bondi quickly — and publicly — agreed to fulfill President Donald Trump’s request that she use the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate Democrats and corporations that may have had ties to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump on Friday declared that Epstein is the “Democrat’s problem” and not Republicans’, then called for the DOJ, FBI, and Bondi “to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, J.P. Morgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions, to determine what was going on with them, and him.”

The New York Times reported that the “inquiry appeared to be retribution for the renewed focus on his own ties to Mr. Epstein.”

Just hours later, Bondi agreed.

READ MORE: Trump Stumbles Over ‘God Bless America’ Lyrics at Veterans Day Ceremony

“Thank you, Mr. President. SDNY U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton is one of the most capable and trusted prosecutors in the country, and I’ve asked him to take the lead. As with all matters, the Department will pursue this with urgency and integrity to deliver answers to the American people,” she wrote.

The New York Times called Bondi’s acquiescence “a stark demonstration of her willingness to surrender the traditional independence of the Justice Department to serve Trump’s personal political agenda.”

The Times also reported that Bondi assigning the investigation to the Southern District of New York “could create significant conflict within an office known for its investigative might and independence.”

NBC News senior White House correspondent Garrett Haake reported that “In July, the FBI and DOJ wrote in their memo that they were not releasing the Epstein files in part because ‘We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.’ – and now, after a push from the President, here we are.”

Legal experts and other critics denounced the moves.

READ MORE: Democrat Warns How Trump Could Engineer a Path to Stay in Power After 2028

“Count the ways they’re corrupting DOJ,” wrote former longtime U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, now an MSNBC legal analyst and professor of law. “Presidents don’t direct AG’s to open criminal cases, especially ones designating only Dems for investigation when POTUS himself is involved. DOJ doesn’t publicize criminal investigations & the AG definitely doesn’t assign them on Twitter.”

MSNBC executive producer Kyle Griffin asked, “If this investigation was legitimate, why wasn’t this investigation opened months ago? If this investigation was legitimate, why isn’t everyone mentioned in Epstein’s emails being investigated?”

Republican U.S. Rep. Don Bacon added, “When the president gives orders to Pam Bondi and our law enforcement arms of the federal government, it undercuts the credibility of our law enforcement.”

“I don’t think it’s appropriate for him to do it. I would ask him not to do that, because all it does is taint our legal system,” Bacon concluded.

Responding to Bondi’s remarks, civil liberties and national security journalist Marcy Wheeler wrote: “Unabashed corruption.”

“This has absolutely nothing to do with crime,” she stated. “Pam Bondi is just debasing her entire department for her liege so that she can stave off Congress from releasing whatever damning information she has on Trump. It’s a cover-up pure and simple and merely an indication of Trump’s desperation.”

READ MORE: ‘Mask Comes Off’: Trump Branded an ‘Elitist’ as Base Scrutinizes ‘America First’ Focus

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

News

Democrat Warns How Trump Could Engineer a Path to Stay in Power After 2028

Published

4 hours ago

on

November 14, 2025

By

One of Capitol Hill’s most prominent — and most vocal — Democrats is warning about what he says are the ways President Donald Trump could try to remain in power beyond his current term.

President Trump has long hinted that he is interested in a third term, and even has had red “Trump 2028” caps as part of his merchandise offering. And while he recently appeared to put to rest questions about a third term — prohibited under a plain reading of the U.S. Constitution — by saying he has been told he cannot run, doubts among some still linger.

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) on Friday shared what he suggested were possible ways Trump could try to stay in power past 2028 — and warned he thinks it’s possible that he will.

“I think he is right now trying to scheme a way to be able to stay,” Senator Murphy told The Bulwark’s Sam Stein at the 2025 Texas Tribune Festival.

READ MORE: ‘Retribution’: Trump Calls for Epstein Inquiry Into Democrats

“I think you have a potential, two potential Supreme Court vacancies coming up,” Murphy noted, “and it may be very important for him to install folks on the Supreme Court who may be willing to entertain radical ideas about the restrictions on the Constitution, about a third term.”

Murphy continued with an alternative theory, suggesting the President Trump “may just be interested in installing Donald Trump Jr. or another family member in the White House.”

But then the Connecticut Democrat served up a warning.

“Whatever he’s planning on doing, he can’t get away with it unless he destroys the ability of the people to speak their mind in elections because he and his party are going to lose in 2026 and 2028 unless he’s successful in rigging the election,” Murphy declared.

He vowed, “we’re going to do everything in our power, and we need to order all of our advocacy in the United States Senate and the House to stop him from doing it.”

READ MORE: ‘Mask Comes Off’: Trump Branded an ‘Elitist’ as Base Scrutinizes ‘America First’ Focus

Murphy continued with his warnings.

“I don’t think anybody with ambition right now should be planning on running for president in 2028 because we may not have a free and fair election in 2028,” Murphy declared. “We all have to be in the business of saving our democracy right now.”

“I do think we have to, all of us,” he added, “be traveling the entire country, whether it be an early primary state or not, to build this political resistance movement.”

READ MORE: Trump Stumbles Over ‘God Bless America’ Lyrics at Veterans Day Ceremony

Continue Reading

News

‘Retribution’: Trump Calls for Epstein Inquiry Into Democrats

Published

6 hours ago

on

November 14, 2025

By

President Donald Trump is intensifying his efforts to thwart attempts to force the release of the Epstein files, even as the House moves toward a vote that could send disclosure legislation to his desk for his signature — or veto — further heightening scrutiny of his past ties to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

On Friday, the president announced he will ask the U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation “to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, J.P. Morgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions, to determine what was going on with them, and him.”

The New York Times reported that the “inquiry appeared to be retribution for the renewed focus on his own ties to Mr. Epstein.”

After White House officials reportedly held a Situation Room meeting with Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert on Wednesday to convince her — unsuccessfully — to remove her name from the discharge petition, the president on Friday took a different tack, appearing both to try to wash his hands of the entire ordeal while refocusing attention on his political opponents and others.

“Epstein was a Democrat, and he is the Democrat’s problem, not the Republican’s problem!” Trump railed on his Truth Social website, while attacking Democrats.

“The Democrats are doing everything in their withering power to push the Epstein Hoax again, despite the DOJ releasing 50,000 pages of documents, in order to deflect from all of their bad policies and losses, especially the SHUTDOWN EMBARRASSMENT, where their party is in total disarray, and has no idea what to do,” Trump alleged.

“Some Weak Republicans have fallen into their clutches because they are soft and foolish,” the president continued. “Epstein was a Democrat, and he is the Democrat’s problem, not the Republican’s problem!”

“Ask Bill Clinton, Reid Hoffman, and Larry Summers about Epstein, they know all about him, don’t waste your time with Trump. I have a Country to run!”

Deadline on Friday noted that “Since the email release, Trump has avoided answering reporters’ questions about Epstein.”

Pointing to Trump’s Friday remarks, Politico’s Kyle Cheney remarked, “Trump again pleads with Republicans to stop talking about Epstein. The pressure hasn’t worked as well as it usually does. Also, the emails show Epstein was politically amorphous, deriding Ds just as much as Rs. And these latest emails were from the Epstein estate, not DOJ.”

Attorney Aaron Parnas added, “I guarantee you if Donald Trump truly believed Epstein was the ‘Democrat’s problem,’ he would have released all of the files by now.”

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.