The European Union claims to stand up for human rights, the rule of law, transparency in government and peaceful, democratic elections. Yet in recent years it has allowed one of its partners, Uganda, to repeatedly violate these ideals.

In 2020 and 2021, President Yoweri Museveni’s government oversaw the most violent election cycle in Ugandan history. At least 54 people were killed during campaign season, more than any election season before. When the dust was settled, Museveni secured his sixth term and 35th year in power. In January 2021, Parliament passed the repressive 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act into law and was soon after embroiled in a series of corruption and embezzlement scandals. In July 2024, over 100 young people were arrested and charged for peacefully marching against corruption and wanton expenditures by the government – in what constitutional lawyers have condemned as a violation of their right to peaceful assembly.

The EU has previously withheld funds for countries where human rights have been abused; suspending financial support for Niger following last year’s coup, and for Ethiopia in late 2020 amid the atrocities being committed by the government in the Tigray war. In 2013, it cancelled €13m of aid to Gambia over a lack of progress in human rights, in part because of a law against homosexuality. In each of these instances, the EU eventually resumed its flow of aid after apparently being satisfied that change was on the horizon.

But it has seemingly turned a blind eye to the egregious state acts that threaten human rights, freedoms and lives in Uganda – including the killing of protesters, arbitrary detention of political dissidents and prevalent infringement on LGBTIQ rights. Publicly, the EU has only issued statements of concern, with an official telling openDemocracy that the rights violations against Uganda’s queer community were “not assessed” to be “widespread and systematic”.

Uganda is an increasingly important trade and development partner for the EU. The East African country’s exports to the bloc have grown from €500m in 2020 to more than €800m today, and in March the EU announced it will allocate €200m of investment for Uganda under its Global Gateway project, which aims to mobilise €300bn for development projects in partner states by 2027.

Since 2017, the EU has also supported humanitarian action in Uganda with an aid package of more than €309m. This year it allocated a further €27.5m for aid in the country, according to the European Commission’s website.

Suspending aid to Uganda would “deprive the most vulnerable populations, including LGBTIQ persons, from vital support. Disengagement by the EU would also create gaps which may be further filled by other players who do not share EU values,” said EU Commissioner for International Partnerships Jutta Urpilainen in a September 2023 statement.

Violations against LGBTIQ Ugandans not “systematic or widespread” enough

In May 2023, Uganda passed one of the world’s harshest anti-gay laws, the 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act (AHA). People found guilty of homosexual acts face life imprisonment under the law, which also introduced the death penalty for so-called “aggravated” cases, such as gay sex with someone below the age of 18 or where someone has a sexually transmitted terminal illness.

The EU’s public response to the AHA was a mildly critical statement. On the day it became law, EU high representative on foreign affairs Joseph Borrel warned that the Ugandan government must “…protect all of its citizens and uphold their basic rights. Failure to do so will undermine relationships with international partners”.

Since then, more than 90 people have been charged under the AHA, says Ugandan human rights promotion and legal aid organisation, the Human Rights Awareness and Promotion Forum (HRAPF). LGBTIQ Ugandans have also suffered at least 1,031 incidents of human rights abuses and rights violations – including breaches of their rights to freedom from torture and abuse – according to a recent report by Convening For Equality, a Ugandan LGBTIQ rights-focused campaign group.

The EU has the power to sanction Ugandan government officials over these abuses using the Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (GHRSR). This mechanism would allow the bloc to invoke travel bans, freeze bank accounts, and forbid EU businesses and governments from making funds available to sanctioned individuals or non-governmental entities. It was adopted by the EU Foreign Affairs Council in December 2020 as a way to hold individuals and entities from non-EU countries responsible for “widespread, systematic” and “serious” human rights violations.

The GHRSR has so far been applied to individuals in countries including Russia, China and South Sudan over a range of human rights abuses, although none related to LGBTIQ rights.

The EU’s stance on Uganda, however, appears to be that there haven’t been enough human rights abuses in the country to warrant intervention via the GHRSR. The violations against Uganda’s queer community did not meet the criteria for sanctions, according to Guilliame Chartrain, the deputy ambassador of the EU delegation to Uganda, in an interview.

“At least if we refer to the AHA, the adoption by a Parliament of a law is not in itself enough as a legal basis [for implementing the GHRSR], it has to produce systematic and widespread effects. The assessment is that Uganda is not in this situation today,” Chartrain said.

It appears things would have to get worse for queer Ugandans before the EU would act. In the absence of targeted sanctions, the EU has increased funding for civil society to respond to victims of the AHA, according to Cathal Gilbert, the human rights officer at the EU delegation in Uganda. The EU and Germany last year allocated €15m for civil society organisations, non-governmental organisations and human rights defenders in Uganda.

The EU argues that its approach is to deal directly (and privately) with the government. “We believe in more direct engagement… without giving the impression that we are publicly interfering into what is in reality, a judicial Ugandan process,” Gilbert told openDemocracy, referring to an ongoing case at the Ugandan Supreme Court challenging the anti-gay law.

The US Congress, on the other hand, last month took a public stance against the AHA. It introduced a resolution that criticised “Uganda’s undemocratic human rights regression” and supported sanctions that the US Department of State in May 2024 imposed on five former and current Ugandan government and military officials over allegations of corruption and extrajudicial killings by the Ugandan army.

In its resolution, Congress condemned the “criminalisation and draconian punishments regarding consensual same-sex sexual conduct and so-called ‘promotion of homosexuality’” and backed a “reduction of support” to Uganda “until the Anti-Homosexuality Act is repealed”.

Arming acts of suppression

Under the EU’s 2008 arms trade policy, member states are legally bound to carefully consider whether any weapons and other military equipment they sell might be used for “internal repression”. This can include “torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, disappearances, arbitrary detentions and other major violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms”.

Yet the EU and its member states are crucial partners to the Ugandan army, providing it with military training and equipment. Six EU members – Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, France and Poland – sold military equipment worth €50m to Uganda in 2022, according to Chatrain. Between 2020 and 2022, EU states also exported ammunition worth €208m to Uganda.

Uganda’s army plays a crucial role in Museveni’s violence and coercive machinery, which aims to repress opposition politicians and protesters, particularly during election years.

At least 54 people were killed and many more injured by armed police and military in November 2020 when riots erupted in support of then-opposition presidential candidate Bobi Wine (real name Robert Kyagulanyi). Wine had been arrested over an alleged violation of Covid-19-related social distancing measures less than two months before the January 2021 election.

Wine’s party, the National Unity Platform (NUP), says that more than three years later there has been no justice for the victims of the riots or for the 28 NUP supporters who have also been held in prison awaiting trial since June 2021, without the option of bail. The supporters, who are all civilians, were charged with illegal weapons possession and their cases will be heard by a military court.

Weeks after the election, the EU Parliament passed a resolution calling for accountability for human rights violations in Uganda, including the 2021 election violence. It recommended sanctioning the perpetrators under the EU Magnitsky Act, a mechanism that allows sanctions to be brought against foreigners involved in human rights abuses. Nothing came of the resolution. Chartrain, the EU ambassador, told openDemocracy that EU Parliament resolutions are not binding, but are taken into consideration by the EU delegation to Uganda as they “reflect the values and the priorities of the EU citizens”.

It has taken no further action. In May, EU ambassador to Uganda Jan Sadek posted pictures of his meeting with Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the country’s chief of defence forces and President Museveni’s son, on X (formerly Twitter). The timing was uncanny. Hours earlier, the US had announced it would be sanctioning five Ugandan officials over allegations of corruption and extrajudicial killings by the Ugandan army.

“Those pictures coming in on the same day [the US] took action raises questions about if the EU also disagrees with what the Ugandan government is doing,” said Agather Atuhaire, one of the Ugandan activist journalists who exposed graft and corruption schemes in government. The EU previously recognised Atuhaire’s work, awarding her the prestigious 2023 EU Human Rights Defender Award.

In 2022, exiled Ugandan author and activist Kakwenza Rukirabashaija claimed that Kainerugaba was present during his forced detention and his torture in a military prison in December 2021. And in July 2022 the Guardian reported that the International Criminal Court (ICC) received a petition that included the testimonies of 215 Ugandans accusing Museveni and Kainerugaba of torturing political dissidents in “secret detention centres” during the 2021 election period.

Chartrain, the deputy EU ambassador, told openDemocracy that the EU does not have a legal mechanism for sanctioning countries or individuals for corruption, and added that the accusations against Kainerugaba have not been proven.

“[He] was not named in the sanctions imposed by the Americans, and according to the feedback that we got from the ICC, there are no open cases concerning Uganda,” Chartrain said. “There are no concrete elements today that could factor into our decision to engage with the Ugandan authorities.”

The NUP told openDemocracy that the petition is ongoing and the ICC may take years to decide whether to investigate.

Is the EU pussyfooting?

Human rights campaigners told openDemocracy that the EU has outright refused to reexamine its relationship with the Ugandan government. “For their own interests… they don’t want to be seen to be too hard on the Ugandan government,” said a past recipient of the EU Human Rights Defender Award, who spoke to openDemocracy on the condition of anonymity.

“It is worse than business as usual. It’s the air of promotion that Uganda is a place where European corporations should come and invest. That’s leverage that [the EU is] creating for an administration that wants LGBTQ+ people to disappear. That’s an astonishing position for a political entity,” said Asia Russell, the executive director of Health GAP, an international organisation pushing for universal access to medical treatment for people with HIV.

In the past, the EU has acted more decisively on Uganda. In 2012, it suspended funding for the country after $13m of aid for refugee settlements was found to have been embezzled through the prime minister’s office. In 2018, Germany withheld €100m of funding for the Ugandan government, demanding accountability for officials implicated in a UN audit that uncovered corruption in Uganda’s refugee scheme.

In a letter dated 16 April 2024, Convening for Equality, a Ugandan LGBTIQ-focused campaign group called for a review of EU funding to Uganda, suggesting that the EU should pause or redirect any funds going through government entities or essential humanitarian support to non-government organisations committed to providing services to and employing LGBTIQ people.

Gilbert of the EU delegation in Uganda responded by saying: “Less than 5% of the funding that we provide in Uganda goes to the government. Almost all of our development cooperation is channelled through development agencies, UN bodies or civil society. So removing that funding is not going to be a hit on the treasury of [Uganda].”

In response to openDemocracy on whether there are considerations for funding to the Ugandan government to be rerouted, the EU Commission said it “deeply regrets” the April 2024 constitutional court ruling that upheld most of the AHA.

It added: “We will continue to follow the implementation of the law and engaging on human rights issues with the Ugandan authorities and civil society as part of our longstanding and broad-based partnership with the country to ensure that all Ugandan citizens, regardless of their sexual orientation and gender identity, are protected and treated equally, with dignity and respect.”

On the 2020-21 election violence, the Commission said: “The EU has expressed both publicly and in our direct contacts with the Ugandan government its concerns about human rights violations in Uganda, including regarding the violence around the 2021 elections. We believe in maintaining an open channel with the government to address these issues constructively.”

The EU’s position is reflective of age-old colonial and imperial power dynamics, says journalist and feminist Rosebell Kagumire, and as such the continental bloc is unlikely to change its stance any time soon.

“African countries are still being extracted, in so many ways. The EU maintaining the leaders that do not serve our countries, but serve them and the small privileged few is one of the most glaring symptoms and manifestations of this,” she said.