Kenyan activist Boniface Mwangi speaks of 'sexual torture' in Tanzania
Warning: This article contains details that some readers may find distressing.A Kenyan activist has told the BBC that he is "struggling to be alive" after allegedly being sexually tortured in detention in Tanzania last month.Boniface Mwangi said he had decided to speak despite the "shame and guilt of being sodomised with all manner of things".Mwangi said he was held in Tanzania after going to the country to show solidarity with detained opposition politician Tundu Lissu.At a press conference in Kenya's capital, Mwangi tearfully claimed that he was stripped naked, hung upside down, beaten on his feet and sexually assaulted while detained.The police chief in Tanzania's main city of Dar es Salaam disputed Mwangi's account and told the BBC they were "opinions" and "hearsay" coming from activists.
"If they were here, I would engage them, I would ask them what are they saying, what do they mean... In law, those things are called hearsay or hearsay evidence," Jumanne Muliro told the BBC.He said Mwangi should make a report to the authorities for investigation.Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan's government has been accused by rights groups of becoming increasingly repressive in the run-up to October's presidential and parliamentary elections.Regional rights groups have called for an investigation, and Amnesty International said Tanzanian authorities should hold to account those responsible for the "inhuman" treatment.Mwangi said he was held by Tanzanian authorities for several days along with Ugandan activist Agather Atuhaire, who had earlier also spoken of being raped in detention.She attended the press conference in Nairobi on Monday, where Mwangi described his sexual assault in graphic detail. He said his torturers would sexually assault him and tell him to say "asante" (thank you in the Swahili language) to their president.Mwangi added that the officers told him they were filming everything and would leak the footage if he spoke about what he had gone through.Mwangi told the BBC Newsday programme that the torture had left him in mental anguish."You have a lot of nightmares, you have a lot of thoughts, and you're alone in the dark, and you're thinking you're going to get killed. So that entire mental anguish lives with you," he said.Ugandan activist alleges she was raped while in Tanzanian detentionTanzania president warns 'meddling' Kenyan activistsMwangi said he wanted his medical records be made public so that "what happened to me should never happen to anyone else"."I have wounds all over my body, I have wounds on my private parts, I have wounds on my feet, I have two broken toes, I have fractures… So I'm still struggling".Mwangi and Atuhaire were among several activists who travelled to Tanzania two weeks ago in solidarity with Lissu who was appearing in court on treason charges that he denies. He has been demanding sweeping changes, saying current laws do not allow for free and fair polls, which the government denies.Lissu was arrested on 9 April following his rallying call of "no reforms, no election". Mwangi told the BBC that their visit to Tanzania was to highlight Lissu's "sham case", adding that this "wasn't taken lightly" by the authorities.President Hassan warned at the time that she would not allow activists from neighbouring countries to "meddle" in Tanzania's affairs.The whereabouts of Mwangi and Atuhaire were unknown while they were being held, sparking widespread condemnation.Mwangi said his "abduction" was shocking in how brazen it was as he had been "picked from a very prominent hotel". "So having been abducted during broad daylight and never knowing where I was, and I was still tortured, means that the Tanzanian government doesn't care about what people think about it," he told the BBC.Earlier, Atuhaire said that despite Uganda being "very dictatorial", she did not imagine she "would find a worse foreign country, a worse government".Mwangi said their experience showed "how broken" countries in East Africa were. "So it makes me more of a pan-African in this fight," he told the BBC.The US Department of State's Bureau of Africa Affairs previously said it was deeply concerned by the reports of the two activists' mistreatment, noting that Atuhaire had been recognised by the department "in 2024 as an International Women of Courage Awardee".Other activists, including Kenya's former Justice Minister Martha Karua and former Chief Justice Willy Mutunga were blocked from entering and were deported from the international airport in Dar es Salaam.Additional reporting by Munira Hussein in Dar es Salaam.
You may also be interested in:
Kenyan president apologises to Tanzania over deportation rowCould this be the end of the road for Lissu, Tanzania's great survivor?Why Samia's hesitant reforms are fuelling Tanzanian political anger'Manhandled and choked' - Tanzanian activist recounts abduction
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
37 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Hungary's crackdown on LGBTQ+ content violates human rights, says EU's top court
A Hungarian law banning content about LGBTQ+ people from schools and primetime TV has been found to violate basic human rights and freedom of expression by a senior legal scholar at the European court of justice. The non-binding opinion from the court's advocate-general, Tamara Ćapeta, issued on Thursday, represents a comprehensive demolition of the arguments made by the Hungarian government defending its so-called childprotection law, passed in 2021. The legislation, which has been likened to Russia's infamous 'gay propaganda law', means that gay and transgender people or themes cannot feature in school educational material or any TV show, film or advert shown before 10pm. In a resounding opinion, Ćapeta wrote that the law was not based on any scientific proof but a value judgment or – backing a position presented by the European parliament to the court – 'a prejudice that homosexual and non-cisgender [transgender] life is not of equal value or status as heterosexual and cisgender life'. Far from protecting children from harm, she concluded, the legislation 'expands such harm'. In her 69-page opinion she wrote: 'The stigmatising effects of the Hungarian legislation, which creates a climate of hostility towards LGBTI persons, may affect the feelings of identity, self-esteem and self-confidence of LGBTI persons. 'Minors who belong to the LGBTI community are especially affected, as the removal of information about LGBTI lives from the public sphere prevents them from realising that their life is not abnormal.' 'It also affects their acceptance by their peers, in school or other environments and thus affects their right to a 'private social life' as well. Therefore, rather than protecting minors from harm, the contested legislation expands such harm.' She concluded that Hungary had violated fundamental rights of human dignity, respect for family life and non-discrimination under the EU treaty and charter of fundamental rights. Ćapeta supported arguments that the law also breached EU commerce and audiovisual laws that prevent governments from imposing restrictions on media companies without a well-founded public interest. The opinion does not bind the court but ECJ judges follow the advocate general in most cases. The Hungarian government has been contacted for comment. Sign up to Headlines Europe A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day after newsletter promotion The European Commission began legal proceedings against Hungary in 2021 after the law was passed. The provisions against LGBTQ+ content were seen as especially stigmatising because they were part of a child protection law targeting child abusers. The opinion comes as Hungary continues its crackdown on LGBTQ+ rights. Lawmakers in April passed a constitutional amendment that codifies a ban on Pride events and allows authorities to use facial recognition technology to track attenders so they can be fined. Last month 17 EU member states, including France and Germany, signed a letter organised by the Dutch government condemning Hungary's anti-LGBTIQ+ legislation and urging Budapest to revise these measures. Many of those member states, 16, as well as the European parliament, joined the European Commission's case against Hungary on the law banning LGBTQ+ content.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Convicted Somalian knife attacker wins human rights case to stay in UK because his clan faces persecution in his home country
A convicted Somalian knife attacker has won a human rights case to stay in the UK because he is a member of a clan that faces persecution in his home country. Abdilahi Essa Darwish, 41, was jailed for violence and wielding a blade in 2021 but has since won an immigration case after an asylum tribunal ruled he could be in danger if sent back. The Home Office tried to deport Darwish after his conviction four years ago but a judge said it was a violation of his human rights. In Somalia, Darwish was part of a minority tribe and it was found that he would face 'persecution' if he was returned to the east African nation. Now he has been granted protection in the UK. The Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber was told that Darwish originally came to Britain in June 2001 and claimed asylum that summer. The hearing in Bradford, was told he was granted Indefinite Leave to Remain in 2002 because he qualified as a refugee due to his clan membership. He was a member of the Shanshiya tribe, which is a sub-clan of the minority Reer Hamar clan, from the town of Afgoye, which is on the south coast of Somalia near the capital Mogadishu. At the time of his arrival more than 20 years ago the Home Office accepted he had a 'well-founded fear of persecution' from majority clans in Somalia. It was concluded he could face harm, punishment, or even torture if he were to return - a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). However, in 2021 the Home Office tried to deport Darwish and revoke his protected status after he committed a knife crime. '[Darwish] committed an offence of possession of a bladed article and affray in respect of which he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment', a tribunal report said. 'Thereafter the [Home Secretary at the time, Priti Patel] made a decision to deport [Darwish] to Somalia and to revoke his refugee status and this was done on January 5, 2021, and the deportation order was made on February 9, 2021.' Darwish, who claimed he had a mental health condition, instructed lawyers to launch an appeal. He won his appeal at the First-tier Tribunal last year but the Home Office appealed that decision at the Upper Tribunal. The Home Office argued that last year's tribunal 'failed to establish a reason for which [Darwish] would suffer persecution on return to Somalia'. The Home Office argued that the circumstances under which he was granted refugee status in 2002 had changed. However, Upper Tribunal Judge Christopher Hanson found that Darwish still remains a refugee for the same reasons as 2002 and so dismissed the Home Office's appeal. The tribunal heard that official country guidance for Somalia states: 'The starting point is that male and female members of minority clans from the south will, in general, be at risk of breaches of their Article 3 rights, and will be refugees, in the absence of evidence that they have a clan or personal patron and the means to access that area of safety without a real risk.' Judge Hanson concluded: 'Whilst subsequent [country guidance] decisions... show that minority clan members are no longer ipso facto at risk of being persecuted in Mogadishu, there is no country guidance indicating that the position in Southern Somalia i.e. outside of Mogadishu has altered. 'Consequently, given that [Darwish] is from Afgoye, South Somalia, the starting point is that[he] continues to have a well-founded fear of persecution in his home area and thus the issue... is one of internal relocation. 'It is clear that the Refugee Convention reason remains a fear of persecution on the basis of a particular social group viz [Darwish's] minority clan membership of the Shanshiya sub-clan of the Reer Hamar.'
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Badenoch to launch review examining whether UK should pull out of ECHR
Kemi Badenoch is expected to set up a review that will look into whether the UK should withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights. The commission will examine whether Britain should pull out of a series of agreements, it is understood. It comes ahead of a speech Conservative leader Mrs Badenoch is expected to make on Friday. The ECHR was a dividing issue in last year's Conservative leadership election, with Mrs Badenoch's rival Robert Jenrick championing the idea that Britain should pull out. Mrs Badenoch has stopped short of calling for the UK to leave, but in February she suggested that the UK would 'probably' have to withdraw from the convention if it stops the country from doing 'what is right'. She told a London event: 'When it comes to the ECHR, I have always been very clear that the ECHR should not stop us from doing what is right for the people of this country and what is right in our national interest. 'And if it continues to do so, at some point we will probably have to leave. 'What I have not agreed with is deciding that we should leave without having a plan for what that looks like and how to do so in a way that makes sense.' The Convention's Article 8 – a right to a family life – has been notably used by foreign criminals to avoid deportation from the UK. The Government's immigration white paper released last month promised legislation to 'strengthen the public interest test to make it clear that Parliament needs to be able to control our country's borders and take back control over who comes to, and stays in the UK'. Sir Keir Starmer said at the time that the 'the right balance' needed to be made between individual rights and 'the national interest'.
