At moments when communities reflect on shared values, dignity, and collective responsibility, it is necessary to confront truths that continue to shape the lives of marginalized people.
Across Tanzania and the African continent, fundamental freedoms remain constrained by laws that did not originate from African societies or traditions. These constraints are not accidental. They are the result of colonial criminal statutes imported in the nineteenth century and preserved within modern legal systems.
This is not a symbolic claim.
It is a historical and legal reality.
The Origins of Sections 154 and 157
Sections 154 and 157 of Tanzania’s Penal Code, which criminalize “carnal knowledge against the order of nature,” were not drafted by African elders, customary courts, or indigenous moral systems.
They originate in British imperial law.
The legal lineage begins in 1533, when England enacted the Buggery Act under King Henry VIII. This statute marked a decisive shift: consensual same-sex intimacy was transformed from a matter of religious doctrine into a crime prosecuted by the state.
This framework hardened over time and reached its most punitive and moralistic form during the Victorian era (1837–1901)—a period defined by strict sexual regulation, gender conformity, and social discipline.
In 1861, Britain consolidated these values in the Offences Against the Person Act, which retained criminal penalties for what it termed “unnatural offences.” This Act became the template for criminal law across the British Empire.
How Colonial Morality Was Exported to Africa
Between 1880 and 1920, Britain imposed standardized penal codes throughout its colonies to ensure administrative efficiency and moral control.
Rather than develop laws responsive to local customs, colonial authorities exported pre-written legal codes.
The Indian Penal Code, drafted in 1860, became the principal model for colonial criminal legislation. Variations of this code were imposed across British-controlled territories, including Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria—and later Tanganyika.
In 1930, under British administration following Germany’s defeat in World War I, Tanganyika formally adopted its Penal Code, including the provisions that now appear as Sections 154–157.
Zanzibar followed a parallel trajectory under British protectorate rule after 1890, incorporating similar criminal prohibitions through colonial courts and administrative instruments.
These laws were never subjected to African democratic processes.
They were not debated by local communities.
They were enforced through colonial police structures, missionary influence, and administrative coercion.
Defending these provisions today as “African tradition” is historically inaccurate.
What is being defended is Victorian England, not Africa.
Pre-Colonial Africa and the Myth of Criminalized Sexuality
Before the Berlin Conference of 1884–1885, which partitioned Africa among European powers, African societies held diverse and complex understandings of gender, intimacy, and social roles.
Historical records show:
-
Among the Langi people of present-day Uganda, Mudoko dako were recognized as individuals assigned male at birth who lived as women and formed relationships with men.
-
In Angola, Queen Nzingha (1583–1663) ruled as a sovereign who openly transgressed European gender norms, adopting male titles and political authority.
-
Across many Bantu, Nilotic, and Cushitic societies, sexuality was understood through community ethics, kinship systems, and spiritual meaning—not through criminal law.
Pre-colonial African societies regulated harm, not identity.
They did not imprison people for who they loved.
They built social systems rooted in belonging and mutual responsibility.
The 2025 Reality: Colonial Law, Contemporary Harm
In present-day Tanzania, the continued enforcement—and proposed expansion—of these colonial-era provisions has produced serious and well-documented harm.
Criminalization has created a legal environment that enables abuse.
-
Extortion and Blackmail: The existence of criminal penalties allows private actors to threaten exposure, knowing victims cannot safely seek police protection.
-
Healthcare Exclusion: Fear of arrest and surveillance drives people away from HIV prevention, testing, and treatment services, directly undermining national and regional public health commitments.
-
State-Sanctioned Trauma: Practices such as forced anal examinations, arbitrary arrests, and detention under the pretext of “public morality” continue to occur. These practices are widely condemned by international medical and human rights bodies, yet they persist—legitimized by colonial-era law.
This is not cultural preservation.
It is institutionalized harm, sustained by outdated legal structures.
Decolonization Requires Legal Courage
A nation cannot claim full sovereignty while enforcing the moral codes of its former rulers.
Decolonization is not symbolic.
It is legal.
It is structural.
And it remains unfinished.
As a human rights organization committed to safeguarding the dignity, safety, and freedoms of LGBTQ+ people in Tanzania, we call for informed and courageous reflection.
To Tanzanians: Let us learn our history honestly—especially the period before colonial rule reshaped our legal and moral frameworks.
To lawmakers: We urge the development of a criminal justice system that protects all citizens from violence and abuse, rather than one that weaponizes inherited colonial statutes against marginalized communities.
To the international community: We seek solidarity—not as instruction, but as partnership in dismantling the lingering legal architectures of empire that continue to shape our legal systems.
True African values are rooted in Ubuntu: “I am because we are.”
There can be no “we” while some of us are forced to live in fear, invisibility, and silence.
Decolonizing the law is not a Western demand.
It is an African necessity.
