Definitions and restrictions on pornography vary across jurisdictions. The production, distribution, and possession of pornographic films, photographs, and similar material are activities that are legal in many but not all countries, providing that any specific people featured in the material have consented to being included and are above a certain age. Various other restrictions often apply as well (e.g. to protect those who are mentally handicapped or highly intoxicated). Pornography is usually expressed as obscene material by law and the meaning and range of obscenity differ from country to county. Most western countries allow hard-core pornography showing genitals and actual penetrations while other countries only allow soft-core pornography without showing genitals and actual penetrations. There are countries that ban pornography completely.
This article excludes material considered child pornography or zoophilic pornography. In most cases the legality of child pornography and the legality of zoophilic pornography are treated as separate issues, and they are usually subject to additional, specialized laws. Specialized laws to address the emerging phenomenon of "deep fake" pornographic content became an active subject of law-making and litigation in the 2020s, although fictional and semi-fictional pornography have existed throughout history.
In Uganda, pornographic DVDs have in the past been sold on the streets. However, an Anti-Pornography Act (popularly known as the "Anti-Miniskirt Law") was signed into law in 2014 with the stated objectives of defining what constitutes the offence of pornography and establishing a Pornography Control Committee. The committee is responsible for the implementation of the law and for taking measures to detect, prohibit, collect and destroy pornographic materials. The law broadly defines pornography as "any representation of the sexual parts of a person for primarily sexual excitement". The law says that "a person shall not produce, traffic in, publish, broadcast, procure, import, export, sell or abet any form of pornography".
ARTICLE 19 Eastern Africa welcomes the 13 August 2021 judgement of the Constitutional Court of Uganda declaring certain provisions of the Anti-Pornography Act 2014 unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court stated that the definition of pornography under section 2 of the Act did not provide for the precise conduct which was prohibited, hence leaving it open to inconsistent application.
Section 2 of the Act defines pornography as: “any representation through publication, exhibition, cinematography, indecent show, information technology or by whatever means, of a person engaged in real or simulated explicit sexual activities or any representation of the sexual parts of a person for primarily sexual excitement.
Read also: Detailed Look at Pornography Laws in Zambia
In its judgement, the Constitutional Court observed that the prohibition of pornography in the law was a limitation of freedom of expression that did not serve a legitimate aim. While the law was passed to allegedly protect women and children from sexual offences, the Court noted that the legal provisions were not rationally connected to those objectives.
ARTICLE 19 Eastern Africa notes that legitimate aims claimed to be pursued must be connected with the measures that have been introduced in laws. This speaks to the doctrine of necessity. ‘The decision of the Constitutional Court of Uganda is commendable and sets an extremely important precedent in the adherence of the three-part test of legality, legitimacy, necessity and proportionality in limiting freedom of expression.
Impact of the Anti-Pornography Act
Since the passage of the Anti-Pornography Act, 2014, police have arrested and charged several people under sections 13(1) and 13(2) of the Act. The sections prohibit, among other things, producing, publishing, or broadcasting any form of pornography, or participation in such activities. They carry a maximum fine of UGX 10,000,000 (approx.
In 2015, police arrested Jemimah Kansiime, a Ugandan musician, and charged her with contravening this section. Her arrest was related to a song in which she euphemistically referred to men’s sexual prowess. Jemimah was the first Ugandan to be prosecuted under the Act. Her case was postponed pending the outcome of the petition to the constitutional court.
Uganda’s constitutional court is scrapping a controversial anti-pornography law whose provisions included a ban on wearing miniskirts in public, in a decision hailed by women’s rights campaigners.
Read also: Laws on Pornography in Egypt
The judgement on Tuesday said that the 2014 legislation, which had been dubbed the “anti-miniskirt law,” was “inconsistent with or in contravention of the constitution of the republic of Uganda.”
“Sections … of the Anti-Pornography Act are hereby declared null and void,” Justice Frederick Egonda-Ntende said in Monday’s ruling, which also struck down the powers of a nine-member committee tasked with enforcing the law.
The legislation criminalised any activity deemed pornographic, from wearing short skirts to writing risque songs, and led to increased public harassment of women who wore clothing considered too revealing.
In 2014, Ugandan pop star Jemimah Kansiime was arrested for performing in a music video that showed her in her underwear.
Having nude photos on mobile and electronic devices in Uganda can land you in jail for up to 10 years under the country’s anti-pornography law, which parliament passed in 2014 with an aim to “stamp pornography out of the Ugandan society.”
Read also: A Deep Dive into Pornography Legislation in Morocco
As part of the clampdown, Simon Lokodo, Uganda’s minister of ethics, told state-owned media that the country has bought an $88,000 pornography-detection machine from a company in South Korea. It will arrive in Uganda next month, he said.
While scant on how the machine will actually work, Lokodo reportedly says it will be able to “detect, control, and scrutinize porn on mobile handsets and other electronic devices.” The ethics minister has previously asked telecoms operators in Uganda to track and block public access to pornographic material.
To implement the anti-pornography law, a government-funded committee has been set up.
The crackdown on pornography fits with Uganda’s conservatism-the country made headlines worldwide when it passed an “anti-homosexuality act,” and though it was annulled in 2014, homophobia in the country remains widespread-and typically, there is strong support from the citizenry for moral policing.
But the irony of spending tens of thousands of dollars on a pornography-detection machine in the face of competing needs that are arguably much more urgent was not lost on everyone.
Amnesty International’s report documents the cumulative human rights impact of the Public Order Management Act, the Anti-Pornography Act and the now nullified Anti-Homosexuality Act. The vague wording of these laws has caused them to be interpreted by the public in a dangerous way. After several women deemed to be “dressed indecently” were stripped in the street in mob attacks, the police publicly stated that the Anti-Pornography Act did not give the public “authority to undress women”.
“Even though the Anti-Homosexuality Act has been nullified its effects are still felt and the fundamental issues have not been dealt with. The Anti-Homosexuality Act was overturned by Uganda’s Constitutional Court in August 2014 on the grounds that Parliament passed it without quorum. Amnesty International is calling on the Ugandan government to repeal discriminatory legislation and ensure the government is not complicit in human rights abuses.
While the Anti-Homosexuality Act was in force people who identified as - or were perceived to be - lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) were arbitrarily arrested, including when reporting crimes against them. The Anti-Homosexuality Act was also invoked to restrict certain assistance to refugees. The Anti-Homosexuality Act also compromised access to healthcare. In June 2014, the Ministry of Health issued a directive affirming non-discrimination in access to healthcare.
Global view of human rights, which are often impacted by laws related to pornography and morality.
Specific Articles and Sections from Various Legal Systems
Here is a summary table of laws and their enforcement by governments regarding pornography:
| Country/Region | Article/Section | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Uganda | Anti-Pornography Act, 2014 | Broadly defines pornography and prohibits its production, trafficking, and distribution. |
| India (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) | Sections 294, 295, 296 & IT Act-67B | Punishes the creation, distribution, and consumption of child pornography with imprisonment and fines. |
| Indonesia | Republic of Indonesia Law No. Article 175 | Punishes the distribution, sale, or public display of obscene materials with imprisonment or fines. |
| Japan | Article 175, Article 243, Article 244 | Pornography showing sexual genitals is illegal. |
| Netherlands | Article 240a, Article 240b, Article 254a | Punishes the distribution of harmful images to minors and habitual commission of related offenses. |
| Russia | Article 242 | Addresses the production and distribution of pornographic materials, with increased penalties for large-scale profit. |
| Ukraine | Article 301 | Punishes the importation, production, and distribution of pornographic materials with fines, arrest, or imprisonment. |
| Australia | Australian Classification Board (ACB) | Online pornography is legal, but pornographic DVDs and magazines are rated X18+ and restricted to adults. |
| Botswana | Article 173 | Prohibits the possession of "indecent and obscene material such as pornographic books, magazines, films, videos, DVDs, Blu-Ray, VHS, and software". |
| Eswatini | Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Act, No. 15 or 2018 | The publication, viewership, and sharing of pornography is legal only if it passes a three-element test. |
Additional Considerations
Uganda’s HIV Law criminalizes transmission and “attempted transmission” of HIV. From a legal perspective, the law’s broad language makes it particularly dangerous.
Uganda’s latest legislative blow to public health, the Narcotics Law penalizes possession of illicit drugs with 10 to 25 years in prison. Trafficking-which encompasses everything from small sales to international export-is punishable with a life sentence.
The law goes so far as to levy a five-year prison sentence for failure to disclose prior prescriptions for narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances (including those held for pets and farm animals) when receiving a new prescription.
Punitive laws like this push people away from health and social services that are vital to managing drug dependence, preventing transmission of HIV, and supporting people to live full and productive lives.
“Drug use in Uganda is on the rise. We need an open environment in which we can share information and talk about addiction,” said a representative of the Uganda Harm Reduction Network. “By further criminalizing drug use, this law pushes people into the shadows.
Constitutional court throws out a controversial law whose provisions included a ban on wearing miniskirts in public.
“We welcome the judgement and reiterate that provisions limiting freedom of expression must be drafted in a clear and unambiguous manner; otherwise they are open to abuse by law enforcement officials and authorities.
The case challenging the provisions of the Act was filed by nine Petitioners including civil society groups and individuals.
Law Reform Comm. opposes Anti-Porn Bill
Popular articles:
tags: #Uganda
