The Global HIV/AIDS and LGBT Movements

A reciprocal relationship exists between HIV/AIDS and LGBT organizing, both historically and in the current era. This chapter analyses the dynamics of the interconnection between these movements since the first description of the disease we now know as AIDS appeared in 1981. It begins by describing the emergence of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the 1980s and how the first organizations dedicated to HIV/AIDS emerged out of and drew inspiration from LGBT groups. It then looks at the specific cases of the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) and the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) and how both groups linked their activism strategies to previous LGBT organizing experiences in the United States and South Africa, respectively. The chapter then examines the reciprocal relationships between the domestic and international levels in HIV/AIDS and LGBT politics. Finally, it explores the tensions between the HIV/AIDS and LGBT movements and the lines of division within the HIV/AIDS movement itself.

South Africa: Contesting the Luxury of Aids Dissidence

Although South Africa has the largest AIDS treatment program in the world, the ANC’s mishandling of the epidemic post-apartheid nevertheless contributed significantly to the spread of the disease. Unlike in Thailand or Brazil – where in many instances professional movements partnered with the state to respond to citizen needs and expand access to antiretroviral therapy – legal movements in South Africa however confronted a remarkably different dynamic: an intransigent government that, by virtue of unrivaled electoral majority, enjoyed the luxury of entertaining dissident AIDS science and experimenting with charlatan AIDS policy. While the strategic actions of the AIDS Law Project and the Treatment Action Campaign would eventually compel government action, initial government intransigence and the long and drawn-out nature of the legal process would prove to have horrific consequences, measured in hundreds of thousands of lost lives.

Adjudicating socio-economic rights – transforming South African society: A response to Linda Jansen Van Rensburg’s paper

It is trite to say that the adjudication of socio-economic rights is a new enterprise in South African jurisprudence, as it is to the jurisprudence of many other jurisdictions. Professor van Rensburg’s paper seeks to analyse the influence of political, socio-economic and cultural considerations on the interpretation and application of socio-economic rights in the Bill of Rights. The pivots for discussion are the decisions of the Constitutional Court in the Soobramoney,1 Grootboom2 and Treatment Action Campaign3 cases which, thus far, are the only cases in which the Constitutional Court has substantively determined the nature and parameters of socio-economic rights and obligations under the South African Constitution. My response is somewhat deferential in that I largely concur with many of the observations that Professor van Rensburg makes. In some respects, however, I have attempted to bring into the analysis of Soobramoney, Grootboom and Treatment Action Campaign not so much new insights, but rather different emphases. Likewise, my response is constructed around the three cases. I begin with Soobramoney.

The possible contribution of civil society in the moral edification of South African society: The example of the ‘United Democratic Front’ and the ‘Treatment Action Campaign’ (1983–2014)

In spite of much candid protest and overt criticism against the service delivery record and corruption of the South African government, the governing party, the African National Congress (ANC), once again secured a persuasive victory in the 2014 national elections. This situation begs the question whether the ballot box is really the only efficient instrument for disgruntled voters to influence government policy and behaviour. This article examines the possibilities that the mobilisation of civil society offers in this regard. The central theoretical argument is that civil society can be an important instrument through which the citizenry can exercise their critical function with regard to the government in an effort to address poor service delivery and corruption and to influence government policy. Christian organisations can play a crucial role in this process. Two examples of past efficient action by civil society serve to illustrate this argument. With the assistance of churches and Christian organisations,these organisations profoundly influenced government policy and are consequently presented as models for action today. The first example is the ‘United Democratic Front’ (UDF) that forced the pre-1994 South African apartheid government to a negotiated settlement despite the strict security laws that the state utilised to keep the UDF in check. The second example is the ‘Treatment Action Campaign’ (TAC) that forced the post-1994 Thabo Mbeki government to adopt a policy of free provision of antiretroviral drugs to HIV-positive patients. These two influential civil organisations offer models of how civil society can act as critical watchdog. In future, these models can be used to mobilise civil society, including churches and Christian organisations, to act correctively in defining and enacting government policy, despite the ANC’s strong position in government and the large majority that the governing party can secure at the voting polls.