Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A POPULAR SINGER in Uganda could face up to 10 years in prison for a music video which may have broken the country’s strict new anti-pornography laws.
21-year-old Jemimah Kansiime, who performs as “Panadol wa Basajja”, meaning “medicine for men”, was arrested in November.
The video for “Nkulinze” (“I am waiting for you”) went online last September, and has been viewed more than 300,000 times.
It attracted the attention of Ethics Minister Simon Lokodo, however, who was reportedly shocked, and described her videos as ”very obscene and vulgar.”
The former priest said singers such as Rihanna – whom Panadol has cited as her hero – were “the type of people I’m condemning.”
“She’s a very provocative dancer… there’s nothing at all good there,” he said.
Now she faces up to 10 years in jail, if found guilty, in the first full trial under the anti-pornography law, which took effect in February 2014.
Human Rights Watch has argued that it defines pornography so loosely it has encouraged public attacks on women wearing skimpy clothing, and Amnesty International has called for it to be repealed.
Other critics say it’s part of a growing anti-liberal movement in Uganda, which includes tough laws against homosexuality.
(The video in question might not be suitable for everyone, but you can watch it here.)
In his continued crackdown on pornography, Lokodo has ordered police to arrest men who procure prostitutes and described a popular TV dating show as prostitution.
Local media also reported that he also confronted Uganda’s youngest MP when she walked into parliament in a short skirt.
Panadol told AFP:
I was aware that there are some sections of society that are conservative.
I was just experimenting to see if I put on a short dress, will the audience like it?
But she says she never dreamed it might constitute breaking the law. She and her then manager Didi Muchwa Mugisha were arrested in November.
Mugisha pleaded guilty and was fined 200,000 Ugandan shillings (€60), but Panadol pleaded not guilty, and was held for five weeks before raising her bail money.
When I was making that video I never intended it for children, I intended it for adults. I did not sell or distribute the song.
My rights have been trampled upon, my freedom of expression has been trampled upon.
She is due in court later this month, but her lawyer has asked for the trial to be put on hold while Uganda’s Constitutional Court deals with a challenge against the law itself.
Contains reporting by AFP.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Can we please stop propagating the lies of the English media? Brexit did the damage, not the protocol.
@James Pelow: Very well said. They’re actually using it as a distraction. And it’s drawing us into something that has nothing to do with us. Brexit is the problem. End of story.
You can’t hold a poll asking people if they think the Protocol is good for Northern Ireland without clarifying what the alternative is.
That’s like asking a child if they think the settlement that their parents agreed to after divorce is good.
Let’s be clear… article 16 does not end the protocol. It can suspend a part of it for a short period of time. When the UK says it will trigger A16, call it out for what they want to do….they want to scrap it and force a border on the island of Ireland or a border between Ireland and EU. That’s their plan and I believe it’s been the plan all along. This mess has been made by the UK and the protocol is a plaster. The GB companies that send those goods that will never end up back in the EU (including ROI) need to be better catered for. The issue is that there is no trust between the UK and EU as, so far, the UK hasn’t implemented main parts of the protocol so all at risk goods must be considered guilty until proven innocent.
Ok theJournal…. Time to correct your headlines… “Is Brexit bad or good for firms in Northern Ireland?”
The protocol is a workaround to the main issue, Brexit..
While I’ve no doubt it has caused some legitimate disruption for businesses heavily linked to GB, how did the study take into account costs (for consultancy etc) that would’ve been incurred without the procotol because they also trade with the EU?
Or how did it take into account all the paperwork NI businesses save because they can trade with the Republic and the rest of the EU freely?
All these analyses seem to assume that trade with Ireland was either insignificant, or its continuity was a a given (neither of these are true) and that any disruption with GB is a cost without any quantifiable benefit (again not true).
It’s not the protocol that’s not working. It’s brexit that’s not working.
How dare the EU break away from the United Kingdom. They’ve made things very difficult for everyone, especially the Brits!
By leaving the CU and SM and going for a Sharia Brexit GB turned itself into a legal and regulatory Kaliningrad. Their call-their choice…If they hadn’t CHOSEN that there would be no protocol. They want a hard border in IRL or IRL out the the EU-they will get neither but what they will get is humiliation.
It is improving trade between north and south.
have your say