Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Banner Left
Banner Right

High Court Ruling Undemocratic, Anti-Christian

Allow me to respond to a report in The Namibian of 25 June, titled ‘Equality and Dignity for All’, by Dianne Hubbard.

As per Hubbard’s unpacking of the High Court’s decision, she correctly states that article 10(2) of the Constitution does not specifically refer to sexual orientation.

The High Court did, however, not find that to be grounds for “discrimination”.

The High Court asserted that sodomy being illegal is a form of discrimination.

If the concern was discrimination, why did the High Court not simply make sodomy illegal for all?

This would have been a much better ruling, as the homosexuals who do engage in sodomy would then not have to feel discriminated against. Sodomy could pose health risks and is a taboo in most religious and cultural belief systems of Namibia.

There was no real unpacking of the High Court judgement in Hubbard’s piece, and she simply restated what the court has already stated.

Another issue I have is that in the last 34 years of independence in Namibia, not one homosexual man or woman has been arrested, charged and sentenced by a court of law for the act of sodomy or for being homosexual. Had we been under sharia law or if Namibia was a Christian theocracy, there would have been actual cause for complaint.

The people of Namibia are mainly Christian, so if the laws of this country are not congruent with the moral and ethical ideals of its people, how can the government be representative of its people?

We, the people, are impeded by the judiciary from fulfilling article1(2), which states: “ . . . the people of Namibia who shall exercise their sovereignty through the democratic institutions of the state.”

This decision of the High Court is undemocratic, anti-Christian and goes against the traditions of all Namibians.

Kaliep Murangi

– Editorial note: There is some evidence that the law was enforced, with 115 reported cases resulting in 64 arrests between 2003 and 2019. However, it appears there was seldom, if ever, a prosecution for consensual sodomy.

Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!

Latest News