How To Approach Key Terms in Advocacy

At a human rights conference a few months ago, a discussion ensued during a panel about why policymakers and rights groups still use the term “Key Populations” (KP) to refer to LGBTQI individuals. This is in relation to a broader conversation about how we address and advocate for marginalized groups. The question remains: Does using “LGBTQI” at proper places instead of “KP’’ foster a more inclusive, respectful, and effective dialogue around the rights and recognition of LGBTQI individuals in Nigeria? Is it just a matter of semantics? Or is it a strategic choice that can influence public opinion, legal reforms, and, ultimately, the lives of many?

While the KP designation serves its purpose in health-focused discussions, it falls short in addressing the broader societal, legal, and personal identity aspects that the term “LGBTQI” covers.

Understanding “KP” vs. “LGBTQI”

The term “Key Populations” is widely used in public health and policy circles to refer to groups that are at increased risk of HIV and other health issues. In Nigeria, as in many parts of the world, this includes LGBTQI individuals but also includes sex workers, people who use drugs, and incarcerated people. While the KP designation serves its purpose in health-focused discussions, it falls short in addressing the broader societal, legal, and personal identity aspects that the term “LGBTQI” covers.

What is more, “LGBTQI” specifically refers to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, and intersex individuals, focusing on their sexual orientation, gender identity, and the unique social and legal challenges they face. It is a designation for self-expression ― a term that goes beyond health implications, touching on issues of human rights, the essence of personal identity, and social acceptance.

Using “KP” can unintentionally obscure the specific needs and identities of LGBTQI individuals.

Similarities and Distinctions

Both “KP” and “LGBTQI” groups are marginalized and often face discrimination, stigmatization, and legal challenges. However, the similarities largely end there. Using “KP” can unintentionally obscure the specific needs and identities of LGBTQI individuals. It groups them with other populations that, while also marginalized, have different challenges and needs. This generalization can dilute the focus on the rights of LGBTQI persons and the issues surrounding those rights, which are distinct and require targeted legal and social interventions.

The Importance of “LGBTQI” in Legal and Social Discourses

The adoption of “LGBTQI” over “KP” in legal and social discourses in Nigeria could significantly influence the protection of the basic human rights of queer people in Nigeria. Here’s why:

• Visibility and Identity: “LGBTQI” explicitly acknowledges the existence and identity of these groups, which is a crucial step towards acceptance and legal protection. Visibility is the first step toward change.
• Targeted Advocacy: Using “LGBTQI” allows for more focused advocacy and legal interventions. It acknowledges the specific challenges faced by these individuals, such as anti-LGBTQI legislation, societal discrimination, and violence.
• International Solidarity: The term “LGBTQI” aligns with global human rights discourses, facilitating international solidarity, support, and pressure for change in countries with anti-LGBTQI laws.
• Empowerment: For many, the term “LGBTQI” is empowering, providing a sense of identity and community. This empowerment is vital for the mental health and well-being of individuals who are often marginalized and discriminated against.

Legal Perspectives

Nigeria’s legal position on the rights of LGBTQI persons remains one of the most complex globally, with laws criminalizing intimate same-sex relationships. This legal environment, therefore, requires a careful and strategic approach in advocating for the rights of LGBTQI persons. The use of “LGBTQI” in legal and advocacy efforts is not just about terminology; it is about affirming the identity and rights of individuals against a backdrop of legal and societal challenges.

Conclusion

Recent events such as the targeting, unlawful arrests and other the violations of the rights of queer individuals in Nigeria underscore the urgent need for legal reforms so as to address situations where people take advantage of their own misinterpretations of the Same-Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act of 2014 (SSMPA) to abuse the rights of LGBTQI persons through violence, blackmail and extortion.  There is an urgent need for a shift in how society views LGBTQI individuals. Using “LGBTQI” in public discourse and legal arguments can help challenge these laws by framing the issues as one of human rights and personal identity, rather than just a public health concern.

Written by Chukwuebuka Alex Ozoani.