Uganda: Non-governmental Organizations (NGO) calls for criminalisaton of ‘sextortion'
Appearing before a joint meeting of the Committees of Legal and Parliamentary Affairs and Gender, Labour and Social Development to present their views on the Sexual Offences Bill, 2024, the DENIVA Executive Director, Peter Magelah said people involved 'sextortion' for financial and other gains should face the law.
'Parliament should make a law to make 'sextortion' illegal. Any person involved in it commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding 500 currency points or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years or both,' Mugelah proposed.
Magelah made the proposals on Tuesday, 11 February 2025 in a meeting that was chaired by Bugiri Municipality MP, Hon. Asuman Basalirwa.
DENIVA also wants a similar punishment applied to persons guilty of recording, viewing and sharing of people's nudity without the consent of persons involved, saying the vice is on increase.
'In Uganda, this has become common especially during artistic performances where people record women's underwear and publish it online and in newspapers without their consent,' said Magelah.
He called for amendment of the Bill and provide for the consent of the Directorate of Public Prosecution (DPP) prior to prosecution of incest.
'It is important to appreciate that such cases have a big impact on the family and could cause other social and psychological problems. Prosecution of such cases requires consent by the DPP so that such considerations are made at a higher level before the cases can go on,' Magelah said.
Basalirwa said criminalising people guilty of viewing and or recording nudity of musicians performing on stage is unfair, noting that some female artistes should bear the blame as they are consistently almost undressed.
'One time I was watching an interview by Sheebah Kalungi, a local artiste who was asked how the public should expect her to dress up for a certain concert, she replied that 'I will definitely be naked'. I am therefore, uncomfortable with your proposal,' Basalirwa said.
Erute South County MP, Hon. Jonathan Odur was equally discontent with the proposal to criminalise viewing of a person who chooses to appear in public almost naked.
'Why do you want to criminalise viewing? Why are you stretching the criminal net so wide?' Odur asked.
The Sexual Offences Bill, 2024 was introduced by Soroti District Woman Representative, Hon Anna Adeke basing her justification on the scattered nature of sexual offences in different pieces of legislation.
'There is need to ensure the legislation responds to the evolving and current trends in sexual offences, curbs sexual violence and adopts international best practices in the prevention of sexual violence,' reads the Bill in part.
Adeke argued that the bill will review and update the sexual offences contained in the Penal Code Act Cap. 128 in order to remedy the new forms of sexual violence and exploitation which are prevalent today, provide for enhanced punishment of sexual offenders, and create new offences to deal with new social vices that perpetuates sexual violence in Uganda.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Parliament of the Republic of Uganda.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Khaleej Times
a day ago
- Khaleej Times
India proposes law to sack ministers facing criminal charges
India's government introduced a bill on Wednesday to remove top politicians if they are arrested and detained for 30 days, which opponents called a "chilling" bid to crush constitutional safeguards. Several of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's opponents have faced criminal investigation or trial in recent years, including two state chief ministers last year. They include Arvind Kejriwal, then chief minister of the capital Delhi, who spent several months in jail on accusations that his administration received kickbacks from the allocation of liquor licenses. He denied any wrongdoing and characterised the charges as a political witch hunt by Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government. Jharkhand state Chief Minister Hemant Soren, also from the opposition, was arrested and jailed on corruption charges in February 2024, accusations he also denies. Indian Home Minister Amit Shah, who introduced the bill, said the government wanted the "value of ethics to increase". The bill would force politicians out of a ministerial post if they were detained for a month and accused of an offence that carries a jail term of five years or more. India's Association of Democratic Reforms, an organisation working on electoral reform, calculated that almost half of the 543 elected national lawmakers had criminal cases against them. Of those 215 cases, 170 faced serious charges -- including rape, murder, attempt to murder, and kidnapping. "We cannot be so shameless that we face accusations and still remain in a constitutional position," Shah told parliament. However, John Brittas of the Communist Party of India-Marxist warned that "in an era marked by vindictive politics, where central agencies are deployed against opposition leaders, the provisions will be misused for ulterior motives". West Bengal state Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee called the bill a "chilling attempt to establish a rule where judicial scrutiny is silenced, constitutional safeguards are dismantled, and the people's rights are trampled". "This draconian step comes as a death knell for democracy and federalism in India," said Banerjee, who is also from an opposition party. US think tank Freedom House said last year that Modi's BJP had "increasingly used government institutions to target political opponents".
Zawya
2 days ago
- Zawya
Musk quietly puts brakes on plans for new political party, WSJ says
Billionaire Elon Musk is quietly putting the brakes on plans to start his new political party, telling allies he wants to focus on his companies, the Wall Street Journal said on Tuesday, citing people with knowledge of the plans. Musk unveiled the 'America Party' in July after a public dispute with President Donald Trump on the tax cut and spending bill. He has recently been focused in part on maintaining ties with Vice President JD Vance, the paper said, and has acknowledged to associates that forming a political party would damage his relationship with Vance. Musk, the world's richest man, and his associates have told people close to Vance that the billionaire is considering using some of his financial resources to back Vance if he decides to run for president in 2028, the paper said. The CEO of Tesla and SpaceX spent nearly $300 million in 2024 to help Trump and other Republicans get elected, exerting enormous influence in the first few weeks of Trump's term as head of the newly created efficiency department (DOGE). Reuters could not immediately verify the Journal report. Tesla and the White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment outside regular business hours. Vance, who had called for a truce following Musk's all-public feud with Trump, reaffirmed his position this month and said he had asked Musk to return to the Republican fold. Tesla shares are down more than 18% this year after it posted in July its worst quarterly sales decline in more than a decade and profit that missed Wall Street targets, though its profit margin was better than many had feared. Musk also warned of "a few rough quarters" after the end of support for electric vehicles by the Trump administration. Investors worry whether he will be able to devote enough time and attention to Tesla after locking horns with Trump over his ambitions for a new political party. (Reporting by Chandni Shah, Shubham Kalia and Mrinmay Dey in Bengaluru; Editing by Tom Hogue and Clarence Fernandez)
Zawya
10-07-2025
- Zawya
Committee on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Expresses Alarm Over Centralisation Risks of National State Enterprises Bill
The Portfolio Committee on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation has expressed significant concerns regarding the centralisation of state-owned entities (SOEs) as outlined in the National State Enterprises Bill (B1-2024). During a meeting on Wednesday, the committee received a briefing from the National Treasury (NT) and the Financial Fiscal Commission (FFC) on the Bill, which aims to develop a strategic approach to enhancing the governance and operational efficiency of SOEs. National Treasury highlighted critical issues, particularly the proposed non-application of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) to the holding company and its subsidiaries, which could undermine transparency and accountability in financial management. NT cautioned that the centralisation model poses risks, such as increased political interference and the potential for state capture, emphasising the importance of ensuring that SOEs remain financially sustainable without undue reliance on public funds. In its presentation, the FFC stated that it does not support the Bill in its current form, noting that it fails to address longstanding governance concerns experienced over the past 30 years. The FFC recommended that the holding company be established within the National Treasury's budget baseline, in accordance with Sections 213 and 216 of the Constitution. During the questioning phase, committee members raised significant concerns about the centralisation issues presented in the Bill. They argued that a centralised model could lead to a lack of transparency and accountability, making it more vulnerable to corruption and political interference. Members highlighted that consolidating oversight of SOEs under a single holding company might exacerbate existing vulnerabilities rather than mitigate them, potentially creating an environment where decision-making becomes opaque and less subject to scrutiny. Additionally, there were worries that centralisation could undermine the transformative goals for SOEs, distancing them from the necessary checks and balances that ensure equitable governance and public accountability. The committee members expressed a strong sentiment that the Bill, as it stands, does not adequately protect the interests of the public or ensure the effective functioning of SOEs. Members highlighted the importance of maintaining robust oversight mechanisms to prevent the erosion of accountability, particularly given the historical context of governance challenges within SOEs. Members voiced their commitment to ensuring that any legislative framework promotes transparency and fosters public trust, arguing that the proposed centralisation could lead to a concentration of power that is detrimental to democratic principles. While National Treasury did not explicitly call for the Bill to be withdrawn in its current form, it acknowledged the necessity for reworking the legislation. The committee flagged the risk that the holding company could be controlled by multinational corporations, raising concerns that Parliament might enact a law that leaves the state powerless in managing public funds effectively. Members articulated a shared apprehension that the proposed changes could inadvertently enable the very issues the Bill seeks to address, further complicating the governance landscape for SOEs. The committee also raised alarms about the fiscal risks associated with establishing the holding company, particularly the significant funding requirement of R615 million. Members expressed scepticism regarding the feasibility of the innovative funding mechanisms proposed. Furthermore, committee members indicated that the Department of Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluation (DPME) appears to be circumventing the public procurement process, suggesting that the DPME's approach could remove SOEs from the public procurement environment altogether. In response to the FFC's presentation, the committee welcomed their directness, contrasting it with the more diplomatic approach taken by National Treasury. Following a robust engagement among committee members regarding the next steps for the Bill, there was a prevailing view to pause its progress in light of the presentations received. The committee resolved to seek further guidance and legal advice, as there was overwhelming sentiment among members to halt the process, despite the Bill already being before the committee. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Republic of South Africa: The Parliament.
