Data Collection and Reporting on Violence Perpetrated Against LGBTQI Persons in Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa and Uganda

[Cluster Area/SDGs]
[Resourcel URL]

Go to Resource

[Relevance]

This report is particularly relevant for humanitarian and development practitioners working in the five case study countries as well as practitioners working in multi-sectoral programming across policy, health and social change; this report also provides concrete methodological considerations for the important work of data collection around violence against the diverse SOGIESC community.

This 90-page report is organised around six indicators for documenting and responding to violence perpetrated against LGBTQI persons, over five case study countries: Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa and Uganda. Indicators prompt states and civil society to, for example, consider the extent to which government authorities collect, disaggregate and analyse data relating to LGBTQI-based violence, or document the number of incidents of anti-LGBTQI violence and report these to government bodies.

The findings are based on an extensive desk review and supplementary interviews. For each case study, the paper identifies a range of political, social and cultural factors that permit or deny the rights of LGBTQI persons, or perpetuate the experience of gender-based violence. For example, in the Botswana case study, the sections are as follows: (1) background information including the basic rights of LGBTQI people in their daily lives, (2) their formal legal status, (3) important cases passed in law relating to LGBTQI rights, (4) social contexts, encompassing public discourse in the political and religious spheres, and (5) LGBTQI people and HIV/AIDS.

The document holds six key recommendations early on in the paper. Recommendations include ensuring prevention of violence against LGBTQI persons is linked to broader systemic violence prevention work; engaging the state in consistent and specific programs of data collection; and ensuring that data collection is coordinated and adequately networked.

[Quote]

"The existing data shows that government officials perpetuate violence and discrimination towards LGBTQI persons at alarming rates."

Most Popular Resources

Beginner's Guide

No such thing as neutral: Understanding the implications of COVID-19 for communities with diverse SOGIE in the Global North

This Think Piece is by Kirsty McKellar, one of Edge Effect’s 2020 interns. Kirsty has recently completed her masters of Development Studies...

We deserve human rights: Interview with Emma Yaaka

Emma Yaaka (he/him) is an LGBTIQ+ advocate who has worked to provide medical services and information to LGBTIQ+ refugees in Kenya and...

This 90-page report is organised around six indicators for documenting and responding to violence perpetrated against LGBTQI persons, over five case study countries: Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa and Uganda. Indicators prompt states and civil society to, for example, consider the extent to which government authorities collect, disaggregate and analyse data relating to LGBTQI-based violence, or document the number of incidents of anti-LGBTQI violence and report these to government bodies.

The findings are based on an extensive desk review and supplementary interviews. For each case study, the paper identifies a range of political, social and cultural factors that permit or deny the rights of LGBTQI persons, or perpetuate the experience of gender-based violence. For example, in the Botswana case study, the sections are as follows: (1) background information including the basic rights of LGBTQI people in their daily lives, (2) their formal legal status, (3) important cases passed in law relating to LGBTQI rights, (4) social contexts, encompassing public discourse in the political and religious spheres, and (5) LGBTQI people and HIV/AIDS.

The document holds six key recommendations early on in the paper. Recommendations include ensuring prevention of violence against LGBTQI persons is linked to broader systemic violence prevention work; engaging the state in consistent and specific programs of data collection; and ensuring that data collection is coordinated and adequately networked.