Kenya: Ruto gangs up with Raila to dismiss LGBTQ ruling

Kenya: Ruto gangs up with Raila to dismiss LGBTQ ruling.
President William Ruto has ganged up with opposition leader Raila Odinga in dismissing the Supreme Court LGBTQ ruling that decriminalised same-sex relations in Kenya. Ruto said the ruling was “unacceptable” and called for it to be “overturned immediately.” Raila said the ruling was a “direct challenge to our African values and traditions” and called on the government to “vigorously defend our culture.”
The Kenyan government’s decision to appeal the registration of gay and lesbian lobby groups has been widely criticised by political leaders. Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua is one of the many voices who have spoken out against the decision, calling it a “mistake” that will ultimately hurt the LGBTQ+ community in Kenya. The decision by the top court to dismiss the appeal means that LGBTQ+ organisations will finally be able to register officially, after a long and arduous legal battle.
This is a huge victory for activists, but the fight is not over yet. The Kenyan government must now take steps to ensure that all LGBTQ+ people are treated with equality and respect. Only then will Kenya truly be a place where everyone can live freely and without fear
On Thursday, during the launch of the second phase of the Hustler Fund, Dr Ruto said that Kenya has no place for the queer community. He emphasised that Kenya is a christian nation and that the queerness community goes against the nation’s values. Additionally, he said that the queerness community is not welcome in Kenya and that they should not expect any sort of tolerance or acceptance.
“I’m a man of God,” he said. “Even though we respect the Supreme Court, our religions and cultures do not allow a woman to marry a fellow woman or a man a fellow man.”
The speaker was referring to the recent Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. While many people celebrated the ruling as a victory for equality, the speaker clearly feels that it goes against his religious beliefs.
This is just one example of the many instances where religion and culture clash with the law of the land. It’s an ongoing debate with no clear resolution in sight.
The President’s comments come after the High Court in Kenya ruled that same-sex marriage is not recognised under Kenyan law. The President has said that he does not believe that same-sex marriage should be allowed in Kenya, and that this is not something that will happen in the country. Mr Odinga has said that it is up to the Kenyan Parliament to change the law if they wish to recognise same-sex marriage, and that the High Court has merely interpreted the law as it currently stands.
Speaking at a conference on constitutional law, the speaker pointed out that Article 45:2 of the constitution guarantees every adult the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, as long as both parties give their free consent. He stressed that it is not the role of the judiciary to make laws, but rather to interpret and apply them – a power which is separate from that of the legislative branch.
At an event for the Hustler Fund, Mr Gachagua said that he was shocked by the recent ruling. He went on to say that he feels the ruling was unfair and that he plans to appeal. Mr Gachagua said that he is confident that he will win the appeal and that he will continue to fight for what he believes in.
In a divided judgement, the apex court said the refusal by the NGOs Coordination Board to register the lobby group would violate human rights based on sexual orientation. The apex court said that the refusal to register the group would deny members of the LGBT community their right to freedom of association and their right to form and belong to a political organisation. The court added that the rights guaranteed by the Constitution extend to all Kenyans, regardless of their sexual orientation.
However, the court held that the country’s law – Section 162 of the Penal Code that prohibits “unnatural offences” (defined as having carnal knowledge with any man, woman or animal against the order of nature) are binding.
The criticism started flowing in almost immediately after the announcement was made. Churches and political leaders were quick to voice their displeasure with the decision, and many felt that it was a direct attack on their beliefs. Some even went so far as to call it an act of war against religion. The criticism has been intense and unrelenting, and it doesn’t seem to be slowing down anytime soon.