Anne Nassovi fled Uganda in December 2013. The 45 year old had used her property to provide a safe haven for other lesbians as homophobic sentiment in the country grew. When her property was attacked by a mob and some of her tenants killed, she sought refuge in the UK. Anne, who as a lesbian faces lifetime imprisonment in Uganda, was detained at the Yarl’s Wood Immigration Centre. Her asylum claim was rejected and on 9 April, she was deported.
Aderonke Apata, a Nigerian LGBT activist, is also detained in Yarl’s Wood, and faces deportation. This year, the president, Goodluck Jonathan, signed into law a bill that makes homosexuality a crime punishable by a maximum of 14 years. "I want to remain in the UK in order to contribute positively to the society and support my girlfriend, who I am now engaged to," she says.
Flora Seggane is another inmate at Yarl’s Wood. The 55 year old Ugandan came to the UK in 2002 on a working visa and overstayed, not realising that the lifelong discrimination she had experienced – attempts to cure her sexuality, physical and emotional abuse, and forced marriage – were grounds for asylum. After a repressive law was introduced last year (dubbed the “Kill the Gays bill” until the death penalty stipulation was removed), she claimed asylum, but now faces deportation.
Uganda and Nigeria are two of the world’s most dangerous places to be a gay man or woman. The UK government is well aware of this. In March 2011, it was one of 85 countries to sign a joint statement demanding an end to the torture and imprisonment of LGBT people in Nigeria and elsewhere. As Uganda and Nigeria have moved towards introducing ever harsher penalties for homosexuality, the UK has threatened to withdraw aid.
But this concern about the global rights of LGBT people does not appear to have been reflected in the asylum system. Last month, the Observer reported that one male bisexual asylum seeker was asked a series of intrusive questions by a Home Office official, including: "Did you put your penis into x's backside?"; "When x was penetrating you, did you have an erection? Did x ejaculate inside you? Why did you use a condom?"; and "What is it about men's backsides that attracts you?"
Insensitive and intrusive questioning is not unusual in asylum cases. Many campaigners have pointed to a broad “culture of disbelief” at the Home Office, where the default position is that the claimant is lying and the onus is on them to disprove this assumption. This poses particular difficulties on a subject as personal as sexuality. Anne Nassovi did not say that she was a lesbian in her first official interview, because the Ugandan translator was from the same tribe as her and she feared the repercussions. It is worth noting that private claimants – for instance, a British citizen married to a foreign national of the same sex – are not expected to discuss details of their sex life or provide evidence of their preferences.
The gay rights group Stonewall has accused the Home Office of “systemic homophobia” in its treatment of LGBT asylum seekers. Stuart Hanson, founder of No Going Back (an organisation that supports LGBT asylum seekers) has stopped short of such a label, telling Channel 4 recently: "The Home Office isn't homophobic. But what I do believe is that the Home Office does not have a good understanding of what it is to be a gay man or woman from Africa."
The British government has made repeated statements on the need to secure gay rights in “a number of African countries” (in David Cameron’s words). Yet the decisions reached suggest that there is anxiety about Britain being seen as a “soft touch” on this issue, leading to a flood of people falsely claiming they are being persecuted.
In a statement, the Home Office said: "The UK has a proud history of granting asylum to those who need it and we do not deport anyone at risk of persecution because of their sexuality. All applicants are required to establish they face persecution, inhumane or degrading treatment in their home country to qualify for our protection."
But the existence of discriminatory laws in Uganda and Nigeria is an indisputable fact. Why then, even after humiliating and intrusive questioning, are we still deporting LGBT asylum seekers to a future that at best involves harsh discrimination and violence, and at worst, a life in prison?
