EDITORIAL: No to the tyranny of the majority
Reacting to Friday’s High Court ruling on the sodomy law, human rights lawyer Norman Tjombe made a great point about constitutionalism and human rights.
He remarked, quite rightly, that human rights are protected by the constitution and are not subject to the majority opinion of members of the public, no matter how powerful and vocal it may be.
The principle of his argument is critical. Our constitution does not promote a tyranny of the majority, therefore, the fact that a significant number of Namibians may, in principle, be opposed to homosexuality does not mean they have a right to dictate how minorities should live their lives. The majority’s numerical advantage does not count in law, whether on homosexuality, land rights or access to water.
It does not matter whether one agrees with homosexuality as an orientation. Like another lawyer, Kadhila Amoomo, remarked on social media on the same issue: “You don’t need to be gay to support human rights...”.
As a country, we have pledged our allegiance to our constitution at all times. We did not adopt a selective or conditional posture, where we uphold the principle of the constitution only when its application is in our favour or aligns with our personal values.
The recurring sentimental arguments, such as the argument that homosexuality is ‘unAfrican’, unfortunately do not pass the test of our constitution.
We agreed, at the inception of our constitution, that no persons may be discriminated against on the basis of sex – a provision set out in our constitution. That ship has sailed.
He remarked, quite rightly, that human rights are protected by the constitution and are not subject to the majority opinion of members of the public, no matter how powerful and vocal it may be.
The principle of his argument is critical. Our constitution does not promote a tyranny of the majority, therefore, the fact that a significant number of Namibians may, in principle, be opposed to homosexuality does not mean they have a right to dictate how minorities should live their lives. The majority’s numerical advantage does not count in law, whether on homosexuality, land rights or access to water.
It does not matter whether one agrees with homosexuality as an orientation. Like another lawyer, Kadhila Amoomo, remarked on social media on the same issue: “You don’t need to be gay to support human rights...”.
As a country, we have pledged our allegiance to our constitution at all times. We did not adopt a selective or conditional posture, where we uphold the principle of the constitution only when its application is in our favour or aligns with our personal values.
The recurring sentimental arguments, such as the argument that homosexuality is ‘unAfrican’, unfortunately do not pass the test of our constitution.
We agreed, at the inception of our constitution, that no persons may be discriminated against on the basis of sex – a provision set out in our constitution. That ship has sailed.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article