Challenges Section 79 of the Zimbabwe Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act 23 of 2004, with the court deciding the provision was overly broad and unconstitutionally vague.
On appeal, the Consitutional Court of Zimbabwe decided the only defence to prosecution is disclosure of known or potential HIV infection and suggested people with HIV can be discriminated against by the law if the reason is to protect public health.
Questions whether the offence of aggravated sexual assault can and should be established for HIV non-disclosure in circumstances where, in the Interveners’ submission, there is no “significant risk” of transmission because of factors that dramatically reduce that risk, such as the use of condoms or an undetectable or low viral load
Urges court to drop a bioterrorism charge against an HIV positive man who bit his neighbour during an argument, explaining the facts about HIV transmission risk. The bioterrorism charges were dropped.
Principle witness requests that testimony be withdrawn and that the case be reviewed.
Outlines the AIDS Law Project’s suit (Petition No. 97 of 2010) against the Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions regarding the constitutionality of section 24 of HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act. The court found that some terms were too broadly defined and that Act contravened Kenya’s constitution.
Contains the High Court of Kenya’s decision in the AIDS Law Project’s suit against the Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions regarding the constitutionality of section 24 of HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act. The court found the some terms were too broadly defined and that Act contravened Kenya’s constitution.