Police violence targeting LGBTIQ+ people in Nigeria: Advancing solutions for a 21st century challenge

Abstract

The Government of Nigeria passed the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act (SSMPA) in 2014, emboldening the human rights violations of LGBTIQ+ Nigerians by state and nonstate actors. Nigerian police enforce morality laws that criminalize same-sex relations, but their role as perpetrators of violence has not been well studied. Using six-year (2014 to 2019) administrative data, this article investigates the prevalence and typology of police violence and abuse of LGBTIQ+ Nigerians. Since SSMPA, violence against LGBTIQ+ Nigerians has risen by 214 percent. Survivors frequently report arbitrary arrest and unlawful detention, invasion of privacy, physical assault and battery, and blackmail/extortion. This study is the first to present serial, cross-sectional findings of LGBTIQ+ Nigerians' experience with the police. Available administrative reports and data were synthesized to produce a general picture of the situation on the ground. Findings point to actionable social and policy recommendations that can be taken to promote police accountability and improve police-LGBTIQ+ community relations.

Full text

Greenwich Social Work Review
2020, Vol 1, No 1, 36-49
https://doi.org/10.21100/gswr.v1i1.1108 ISSN: 2633-4313
Contact: sgiwa@mun.ca 36 © Greenwich Social Work Review
Police violence targeting LGBTIQ+ people in
Nigeria: Advancing solutions for a 21st century
challenge
Sulaimon Abiodun Olawale Giwa1,2, Carmen H. Logie3, Karun K. Karki4, Olumide
F. Makanjuola5 and Chinonye Edmund Obiagwu6
1 School of Social Work & Department of Sociology (Police Studies), Memorial University of
Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
2 Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, St. Thomas University, Fredericton, New
Brunswick, Canada
3 Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
4 School of Social Work and Human Services, University of the Fraser Valley, Abbotsford, British
Columbia, Canada
5 Sexual Health and Rights Advocate, Nigeria
6 Legal Defence and Assistance Project (Human Rights Lawyer), Nigeria
Received 19 April 2020
Accepted for publication 18 June 2020
Published 30 June 2020
Abstract
The Government of Nigeria passed the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act (SSMPA) in 2014, emboldening the
human rights violations of LGBTIQ+ Nigerians by state and nonstate actors. Nigerian police enforce morality laws
that criminalize same-sex relations, but their role as perpetrators of violence has not been well studied. Using six-
year (2014 to 2019) administrative data, this article investigates the prevalence and typology of police violence
and abuse of LGBTIQ+ Nigerians. Since SSMPA, violence against LGBTIQ+ Nigerians has risen by 214 percent.
Survivors frequently report arbitrary arrest and unlawful detention, invasion of privacy, physical assault and
battery, and blackmail/extortion. This study is the first to present serial, cross-sectional findings of LGBTIQ+
Nigerians’ experience with the police. Available administrative reports and data were synthesized to produce a
general picture of the situation on the ground. Findings point to actionable social and policy recommendations
that can be taken to promote police accountability and improve police-LGBTIQ+ community relations.
Keywords: Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act; LGBTIQ+; police violence and abuse; human rights; Nigeria
1. Introduction
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender/gender diverse,
intersex and queer (LGBTIQ+) people live in contexts of
danger and precarity in many global regions. In 70 countries
across the world, same-sex sexual practices are criminalized;
in 44 of these countries, legal constraints are applied to both
men and women (Mendos, 2019). These countries include 31
of 54 African countries, of which 24 criminalize same-sex
practices for both men and women and 7 between men only
(Mendos, 2019). In many of these countries, LGBTIQ+
people’s human rights are repeatedly violated with no recourse
to justice (Kennedy et al., 2013; Poteat et al., 2011; Zahn et
al., 2016). Punishments range from flogging (Sudan) to life
imprisonment (Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia) and the death
penalty (Sudan, the southern part of Somalia and 12 Nigerian
states; Mendos, 2019). Eleven countries in Africa have
‘morality’ laws that prohibit public expressions of sexual and

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
37
gender diversity, including provision of information for
LGBTIQ+ people (Mendos, 2019). In 19 African countries,
the right to develop and register LGBTIQ+ agencies and non-
governmental organizations is restricted (Mendos, 2019).
These regulations limit civil society’s participation and ability
to advocate for LGBTIQ+ rights and services.
Human-rights violations of LGBTIQ+ people in sub-
Saharan Africa are rooted in perceptions that same-sex
identities and gender diversity are foreign or Western
influences, therefore ‘un-African’. This thinking persists
despite anthropological evidence that same-sex relationships
have existed since precolonial times in Africa. Murray and
Roscoe (1998, p. 6), for example, have argued that same-sex
practices have been a ‘consistent and logical feature of African
societies and belief systems’. As African societies emerged
from European colonial rule, the inclusive views they once
held gave way to discriminatory and punitive responses to
sexual orientation and gender diversity. Precolonial social
acceptance was undermined through colonial laws fuelling
discriminatory practices that today continue to undermine—
and erase—LGBTIQ+ Africans from memory, imagination
and nation building. Former colonial powers introduced most
of the current laws criminalizing same-sex practices in African
contexts, yet they have removed these laws in their own
countries, labelling them as discriminatory. Semugoma,
Nemande and Baral (2012) describe this as ‘the irony of
homophobia in Africa’. For example, in the Nigerian Criminal
Code any act of same-sex practices is outlawed including oral
and penetrative sex; these are described as ‘carnal knowledge
against the order of nature’ and ‘acts of gross indecency’ (The
Federation of Nigeria, 1916).
Many reasons are given for the denial of LGBTIQ+ human
rights in many parts of Africa. These include religion; concern
with preserving the traditional (heteronormative) family unit;
fear of HIV transmission; protecting children from imagined
child abuse; and the perception that LGBTIQ+ Africans will
receive preferential treatment (Human Rights Watch, 2016;
Sexual Minorities Uganda, 2014). This perception is grounded
in the idea that extending equal rights to LGBTIQ+ Africans
would normalize non-heterosexual orientations and in turn
result in ‘special’ or ‘additional’ rights and privileges. No
scientific evidence substantiates claims that recognition and
protection of LGBTIQ+ rights would have negative societal
impacts. The contrary is true: human-rights violations among
LGBTIQ+ people compromise health. For instance, an article
focused on the immediate effects of the passage of the Same-
Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act (SSMPA) reported an
increased fear of seeking health care, and avoidance of health
care and HIV prevention and treatment services among men
who have sex with men in Nigeria (Schwartz et al., 2015).
This article presents exploratory research on the role that
the police may play in constraining LGBTIQ+ people’s sexual
and gender rights. As part of the state apparatus designed to
uphold the rule of law, police may act in ways that restrict and
infringe on the rights of LGBTIQ+ people (Zahn et al., 2016).
International non-governmental organizations have
consistently reported the problem of police violations of
LGBTIQ+ people’s rights (Human Rights Watch, 2016);
however, knowledge is lacking on the prevalence and forms
of police violence and abuse. This case study about police
violence against LGBTIQ+ people in Nigeria draws on a
human rights–based framework to illustrate this argument.
Nigeria is an appropriate case study due to its hostile legal and
social environment: same-sex sexuality and gender non-
conformity are criminalized, either by imprisonment in states
without Sharia law, or by death penalty in states under Sharia
law (Amnesty International, 2013; Carroll and Mendos,
2017).
2. Human rights-based conceptual framework
In certain global contexts, LGBTIQ+ people are denied
their basic rights to participate fully in everyday life (Mendos,
2019). The inequality and marginalization they experience
keep them in a position of disadvantage (Dentato, 2018). At
the core of the global human rights–based framework
captured in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) is the belief that all human beings are born free and
equal in dignity and in rights (UDHR, 1948). The framework
employs a two-pronged objective for populations that are
marginalized or excluded, vulnerable and discriminated
against. First, rights holders are empowered to claim and
exercise their inalienable rights (UNDG Human Rights
Working Group, 2003). Second, official authorities are held
accountable to promote and protect the human rights of all
citizens, without discrimination on the basis of a prohibited
ground (e.g. sexual orientation or gender identity; UNDG
Human Rights Working Group, 2003).
LGBTIQ+ people’s lives flourish in global regions where
their right to life, security and protection by the state is
safeguarded (Mendos, 2019). However, LGBTIQ+ people’s
human rights are not recognized or protected everywhere.
Thus, they are at risk for discrimination, abuse, poor health
and death (Marks, 2006). The Yogyakarta Principles (2007),
a benchmark for the international protection of human rights
in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity, upholds
UDHR principles by reaffirming the duty of individual states
to ensure that LGBTIQ+ people are protected against
violence or bodily harm from both state and nonstate actors.
A human rights–based approach may result in social
justice for the most vulnerable and marginalized members of
society (Ife, 2012; Reichert, 2007), including LGBTIQ+
people in Nigeria. It would promote the use of legal
mechanisms for rights protections and ensure access to
essential services free from discrimination (e.g. freedom from
police violence and abuse). Finally, it would reinforce the

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
38
concept that LGBTIQ+ people are citizens who should be
recognized and treated as such (Broberg and Sano, 2018).
3. Contextualizing police violence and abuse in Nigeria
Before Nigeria was colonized by Britain in 1861,
traditional, Indigenous policing was common throughout the
region. It embraced informal social control and restorative
justice values, rooted in religious and social structures
(Arisukwu, 2012; Ikuteyijo and Rotimi, 2012). Traditional
rulers were involved in the day-to-day resolution of crimes
and dispute settlement (Zumve, 2012); transgressors were
required to make amends to their victims and the community,
based on established norms. This system of crime control
allowed for law and order to be maintained, without much
violence taking place.
However, when Britain expanded its colonial powers
across Nigeria, it replaced traditional policing methods with
Western systems of policing (Tamuno, 1970). It became
commonplace for police to use violent force against Nigerians
to silence dissent or resistance to British colonial rule.
Compliance and defensive weapons were means to subjugate
and otherwise incapacitate—or even kill—those who
contested colonial labour exploitation. The Women’s Riot of
December 1929 to January 1930, where the military and police
were deployed, resulted in the death of 55 women; more than
50 other women were seriously injured (Alemika and
Chukwuma, 2000). In the Enugu colliery strike in 1949, 21
miners were killed, and 50 others wounded (Alemika and
Chukwuma, 2000). A similar pattern of events unfolded
during the Tiv Riots of 1960—the same year that Nigeria
gained its independence from Britain—wherein 19 civilians
were killed and 83 injured (Alemika and Chukwuma, 2000).
The strategy of using violent repression marked the police
relationship with the public; this has continued to the present
day.
Contemporary police violence against the general
population in Nigeria is widespread and well documented
(Alemika and Chukwuma, 2000). Political and socioeconomic
instability in the country, coupled with institutional
management problems internal to the police force, has long
been argued to foster a climate of lawlessness, corruption,
intimidation, confrontation with the public, and harassment
(Karimu, 2014). Under successive military regimes, Nigerian
police have enforced authoritarian directives that have
stymied the development and functioning of democratic
institutions (Arisukwu, 2012). The lack of sustained
government investment in the police force has further
contributed to a situation where police personnel are ill
equipped to meet public safety priorities and the emerging
needs of local communities (Ikuteyijo and Rotimi, 2012),
giving rise to vigilante groups such as the Bakassi Boys
(disbanded by the federal government in 2002). Such groups,
unlike rogue individuals and mobs, have been emboldened by
the ineffectiveness of the police in curbing crime (Taft and
Haken, 2015) and have used more violence. According to
Karimu (2014, p. 82), ‘No government agency in Nigeria
except the defunct National Electric Power Authority has been
so severely criticized as the Nigeria police for not living to its
responsibilities and expectations’.
Nigerian police have been found to routinely engage in
behaviours that undermine the rule of law (Alemika and
Chukwuma, 2000). In extortion-related confrontations at
roadblocks meant to combat crime, ordinary citizens have
reportedly been beaten, sexually assaulted, and/or killed for
not paying bribes to the police (Human Rights Watch, 2005,
2010). LGBTIQ+ people have also been targeted in LGBTIQ+
spaces such as at parties organized by LGBTIQ+ members or
on social networking and online dating applications like
Grindr, Manjam or 2go, in order to intimidate or extort money
from them (Okereke, 2019). These abuses have often acted as
foils for the police to extort even more money from the
families of those in custody (Human Rights Watch, 2005,
2010). The corrupt system of ‘returns’, in which junior
officers pay their superiors some of the money collected from
bribes and extortions, fosters a culture of impunity that
incentivizes these abuses to continue with disregard for any
form of accountability (Human Rights Watch, 2005, 2010).
4. Sociolegal contexts of police brutality and abuse of
LGBTIQ+ people in Nigeria
Internationally, the development of LGBTIQ+ advocacy
may be traced to specific incidents that sparked a movement
for LGBTIQ+ rights, such as the Stonewall rebellion in New
York City (Carter, 2004). Compared to these, the current
struggle for LGBTIQ+ human rights in Nigeria may be argued
to stem from provisions in the penal code and SSMPA
criminalizing consensual same-sex relations in the country.
Sections 214, 215, and 217 of Nigeria’s Criminal Code Act
(The Federation of Nigeria, 1916) permit the state to penalize
sexual practices between persons of the same sex. More
recently, the Nigerian government passed the Same-Sex
Marriage (Prohibition) Act (SSMPA), which came into effect
in January 2014 (Refworld, 2019). The Act imposes far-
reaching restraints on LGBTIQ+ people’s lives in Nigeria
(Adebanjo, 2015; Adeoye, 2019; Sogunro, 2017). Along with
barring same-sex marriage or civil union, cohabitation
between same-sex partners, and direct or indirect public
display of same-sex relationships, it prohibits the registration
and lawful assembly of LGBTIQ+ groups, organizations,
clubs and societies. Supporters and human rights defenders
also face severe punishment that can include up to 10 years in
prison (Refworld, 2019). According to the international non-
governmental organization Human Rights Watch (2016),
public violence and police abuse of LGBTIQ+ people in
Nigeria have increased since the passage of SSMPA. Its

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
39
punitive laws promote a climate of fear and anxiety among the
general population, which contributes to a cycle of
misconceptions and stigma leading to aggression and
violence, as well as conveying to LGBTIQ+ Nigerians that
their lives are disposable (Bass and Lee, 2015).
The police are the enforcement arm of the state when it
comes to constraining LGBTIQ+ people’s rights. In Nigeria,
they play an important role in upholding state-sanctioned
decrees that legitimize violence (Human Rights Watch, 2016).
Nigeria’s Constitution guarantees the human rights of all its
citizens and makes no specific reference to sexual orientation
and gender identity. However, SSMPA can result in increased
violence against LGBTIQ+ people (Schwartz et al., 2015).
Indeed, while police as an institution are at the nexus of
enforcing discriminatory laws against LGBTIQ+ people, they
simultaneously have the responsibility to protect and serve
marginalized and vulnerable populations, ostensibly including
LGBTIQ people (United Nations Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights, 2018). Such denial of rights
protection results in LGBTIQ+ Nigerians having no recourse
to justice.
The denial of human-rights protection promoted by
SSMPA thus leaves the Nigerian police in a precarious
position: the fundamental rights of some citizens are respected
and upheld, while those of LGBTIQ+ people are denied. This
situation is ironic because of the disconnect between police
primary responsibilities as described on paper—to serve
‘mankind [sic]; to safeguard lives and properties; to protect the
innocent against oppression or intimidation and the peaceful
against violence or disorder; and to respect the constitutional
rights of all men [sic] to liberty, equality and justice’
(Premium Times, n.d., ‘Primary Responsibilities of a Police
Officer’)—and the way it is practised in real life. In failing to
extend protection from discrimination to LGBTIQ+ people, as
guaranteed by the Constitution to all Nigerians, the ability of
the police to foster a positive relationship with the LGBTIQ+
community is undermined.
5. Methodology
Prior to SSMPA coming into effect in January 2014, to our
knowledge there had been no systematic effort to collect
statistical data on the human-rights violations experienced by
LGBTIQ+ people by the Nigeria Police Force. Likely sources
of data—the Nigeria Police Force and the Ministry of Police
Affairs—do not collect this type of information. In both cases,
the ability of state actors to recognize the negative
consequences of SSMPA and other anti-LGBTIQ+ legislation
is undermined by a lack of data, without which it is difficult to
establish a starting point from which to track progress over
time.
Since SSMPA’s enactment, the organization Initiative for
Equal Rights (TIERS), in collaboration with several
LGBTIQ+ human-rights organizations, has documented
reports of violence. These reports (dating from 2014 to 2019)
and the figures and tables generated by the authors constitute
our data sources for this research. Sources for the reports
included survivors, friends and/or eyewitnesses, TIERS
community-based paralegals, media reports and 24-hour call-
in hotline numbers. In 2015, TIERS published a report on
human-rights violations for the period December 2014 to
November 2015 (TIERS, 2015). They published similar
reports for the periods December 2015 to November 2016 and
December 2016 to November 2017, respectively (TIERS,
2016, 2017). The most recent reports, published in 2018 and
2019, covered the periods December 2017 to November 2018
and December 2018 to November 2019, respectively (TIERS,
2018, 2019).
The human-rights unit at TIERS authenticated and
completed status reports on all reported cases. The intake
documentation tool featured a questionnaire section on the
survivor’s sexual orientation, gender identity/expression and
social identity—were they out, not out, or actively part of any
known LGBTIQ+ community/organization in Nigeria. Intake
case managers also asked survivors if they believed they had
been violated because of their real or perceived sexuality or
gender identity/expression, and gathered additional data like
screenshots, photos, affidavits, medical forms and police
complaint forms, if available. Survivors were informed that
case data would be featured in TIERS’s annual report, which
would not include their personal information without their
consent. TIERS also have a status section to track ongoing
cases.
Summative qualitative content analysis was employed to
make sense of the data (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). Keyword
frequency counts or manifest content were incorporated and
then broadened inductively to include an analysis of latent
meanings or themes (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). First, each
report was read in its entirety to develop a deeper
understanding of the phenomenon of interest. Next,
administrative data contained in the reports were closely
examined to identify, group, and quantify words for content
usage. This process was manually facilitated with the aid of
coloured markers, organizing data into meaningful patterns
(Givens, 2008). Using Word document functions, the resulting
data were captured in figures and a table, including relative
and absolute figures. Finally, the data were interpreted against
the context of SSMPA’s impacts on LGBTIQ+ rights in
Nigeria.
6. Findings and discussion
As Figure 1 shows, between SSMPA’s introduction in
2014 and 2019, the frequency and number of reported
instances of violence and human-rights violations against
LGBTIQ+ people by state actors, nonstate actors, and state

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
40
and nonstate actors combined has steadily increased. In
general, reports of LGBTIQ+ violence and human right
violations increased 214 percent. (An exception was 2016,
which saw a drop in the number of reported cases from the
previous year, from 172 to 151.) Men were more likely than
women to report having experienced violence and violations
of their human rights. There were 129, 228, 265 and 344
reported violations against men in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019
respectively. (These figures are higher than reported
violations for the same years, perhaps because they take into
consideration the total number of people violated and not just
the total number of violations.) In the same years 28, 19, 21
and 53 reported violations were against women. No
breakdowns for reported violations by gender were available
for the years 2014 and 2015.
It is important to note that because of actual or perceived
threats of violence, these numbers may underestimate true
prevalence. Survivors may have decided not to report their
case for fear of retaliation or further abuse by police (Angeles
and Roberton, 2020; Dario et al., 2020; Giwa and Jackman,
2020; Herek, 1989; Hodge and Sexton, 2018; Human Rights
Watch, 2016; Mallory, Hasenbush and Sears, 2015; Miles-
Johnson, 2013; Nyanzi, 2014). Nonetheless, the data suggest
a possible relationship between SSMPA and the spike in
LGBTIQ+ violence and human-rights violations, but causality
cannot be inferred, as no earlier data exist for comparison. As
discussed previously, Nigeria has had anti-LGBTIQ+ laws as
part of its social fabric since 1916.
How the frequency and prevalence of historical violence
compares with current figures is unknown. Community-level
stigma and discrimination towards LGBTIQ+ people have,
according to Adebanjo (2015), persisted for a long time and
could be seen to contribute to mistreatment of LGBTIQ+
Nigerians. The observed increase in LGBTIQ+ violence and
human-rights violations may thus reflect rising community-
level stigma, or it may reflect the synergistic effect of the law
on community attitudes and behaviours. This deserves
additional, rigorously designed research attention.
Figure 1. Prevalence of reported LGBTIQ+ violence and human-rights violations in Nigeria, 2014-2019
Figure 2 illustrates the reported violations by state actors,
nonstate actors, and state and nonstate actors combined. This
figure demonstrates that nonstate actors accounted for most
reported perpetrations of violence against LGBTIQ+ people.
From 2014 to 2018, the reported number of violations among
state actors was stable except for 2017, when the average
decreased by 27 percent. However, in 2019, there was a 100
percent increase in the average over the previous five years.
These findings suggest that Nigeria remains a dangerous place
for the safety and inclusion of LGBTIQ+ people.
By contrast, reported violations rose by 57 percent among
nonstate actors between 2014 and 2015 (from 79 to 124). This
was followed by a decline of 15 percent between 2015 and
2016 (from 124 to 106) and an increase of 58 percent between
2016 and 2017 (from 106 to 168). There was an additional
slight increase of 1.2 percent between 2017 and 2018 (from
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
41
168 to 170). This was followed by a substantial increase of 44
percent between 2018 and 2019 (from 170 to 244). The rise in
reported violence perpetrated towards LGBTIQ+ people by
nonstate actors—such as individual persons, mobs and
vigilante groups—can be situated in the larger context of
criminalization of LGBTIQ+ identities, expressions and
organizations. For reasons discussed earlier, the existing
culture of violence in Nigeria also makes it easier for
LGBTIQ+ people’s rights to be violated. Pervasive violence
may produce a climate of impunity for nonstate actors, who
can perpetrate violence towards LGBTIQ+ people while being
perceived by the state and police as fulfilling the community’s
wish to constrain sexual and gender diversity (Adebanjo,
2015).
When individual citizens and mobs violate the human
rights of LGBTIQ+ people and their actions are ignored or
overlooked by the police, LGBTIQ+ people are silenced from
speaking out about their abuse. For example, in a research
report based on 73 interviews with LGBT people, Human
Rights Watch (2016) found that LGBT Nigerians feared
reporting their abuse to police since doing so could elevate
their risk for further harm. Violence by community and police
therefore further constrain sexual and human rights by
rendering LGBTIQ+ people unable to seek justice.
As can be seen in Table 1, the top-reported forms of
violence and human-rights violations by nonstate actors (i.e.
individuals, mobs and private groups implicated in the
violation of LGBTIQ+ human rights) were physical assault
and battery; blackmail and extortion; harassment
(unspecified); stigma and discrimination; and defamation.
Correspondingly, the top-reported violations by state actors
(i.e. police, judiciary and other agents who act on behalf of the
government or its agencies) were arbitrary arrest and unlawful
detention; invasion of privacy; physical assault and battery;
and blackmail and extortion.
Figure 2. Reported violence and human-rights violations by state, nonstate, and state and nonstate actors
against LGBTIQ+ persons in Nigeria, 2014 to 2019.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
State Actors Nonstate Actors State Actors and Nonstate Actors

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
42
Table 1. Violence and Human-Rights Violations Against LGBTIQ+ People in Nigeria, 2014 to 2019.
Type of violation
2019
Perpetrated by
2018
Perpetrated by
2017
Perpetrated by
2016
Perpetrated by
2015
2014
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
Actors
not
specified
no./%
Actors
not
specified
no./%
Arbitrary/unlawful
arrest & detention
42/38%
4/15%
22/39%
6/2%
1/14%
9/20%
2/1%
6/32%
19/42%
6/4%
9/36%
27/23%
39/35%
Attempted murder,
murder &
manslaughter
1/0.3%
1/2%
3/1%
1/2%
2/1%
2/1%
Blackmail/bribery/
extortion
14/13%
54/15%
5/19%
10/18%
57/24%
3/43%
2/4%
65/29%
3/16%
4/9%
44/27%
6/24%
54/46%
19/17%
Breach of
confidentiality,
invasion of privacy
16/14%
12/3%
2/7%
10/18%
15/6%
1/14%
15/35%
15/7%
3/16%
11/24%
11/7%
4/16%
Defamation
12/3%
15/6%
1/2%
19/8%
1/5%
3/7%
16/10%
3/12%
Denial of fair trial/
hearing
2/4%
1/5%
3/7%
1/1%
Deprivation of liberty,
peaceful assembly
5/1%
1/2%
1/0.4%
1/2%
2/1%
Discrimination &
stigma
4/4%
29/8%
1/4%
1/2%
21/9%
1/2%
15/7%
1/5%
6/4%
Forceful eviction
14/4%
12/5%
25/11%
10/6%
Harassment
(unspecified)
9/8%
34/10%
16/7%
Hate speech & crime
5/1%
3/1%
Kidnap
4/1%
3/1%
1/2%
1/0.4%
2/1%
(table continues)

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
43
Table 1. (cont’d.)
Type of violation
2019
Perpetrated by
2018
Perpetrated by
2017
Perpetrated by
2016
Perpetrated by
2015
2014
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
State
actors
no./%
Nonstate
actors
no./%
All
actors
no./%
Actors
not
specified
no./%
Actors
not
specified
no./%
Mob attack
6/2%
1/2%
10/4%
1/2%
4/2%
3/2%
9/8%
Physical harassment,
assault & battery
17/15%
82/23%
6/22%
4/7%
37/15%
6/13%
44/19%
2/11%
2/4%
31/19%
37/31%
34/31%
Police brutality
2/4%
1/0.4%
1/14%
Rape, attempted rape
1/1%
10/3%
12/5%
1/2%
4/2%
2/1%
Sexual harassment,
assault
1/1%
13/4%
2/7%
3/5%
1/14%
1/1%
Theft
23/7%
2/7%
10/4%
1/2%
10/4%
1/2%
10/6%
1/4%
Threat to life
14/4%
1/4%
1/2%
11/5%
2/4%
10/4%
1/5%
1/2%
10/6%
2/8%
10/9%
Torture
4/4%
8/2%
2/4%
5/2%
6/3%
1/5%
2/1%
Trespass
1/0.4%
Verbal abuse
3/3%
25/7%
4/15%
2/1%
Wrongful dismissal
2/1%
2/1%
3/2%
Note: Percentages are for the year specified. They have been rounded off and may not add up to 100%. ‘All actors’ comprises state and nonstate actors acting together.
For 2014 and 2015, available data from TIERS did not specify whether reported violence and human-rights violations were committed by state actors, nonstate actors,
or both. Only the raw totals were provided for the reported top violations.

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
44
Although most violence and human-rights violations by
state and nonstate actors were carried out independently of
each other (except for 2014, for which data are unavailable)
both groups acting together were also implicated in the abuse
of LGBTIQ+ people. Figure 2 shows that in 2015 there were
10 reported cases of violations by state and nonstate actors in
unison. This figure rose to 16 in 2016, an increase of 60
percent. It dropped, however, in 2017 to 10, a decline of 38
percent. Then, in 2018, it plummeted again to 4, a decline of
60 percent. However, there was an increase from 4 to 12 in
2019, marking a historic growth of 200 percent.
We suspect that the Public Complaint Rapid Response
Unit News Bulletin from the Inspector General of Police in
2016 may have had an effect on the behaviours of police
officers (Abimboye, 2016) and could help to explain the
observed decline between 2017 and 2018. The Bulletin
cautioned officers against illegal mobile phone checks and
stressed severe disciplinary actions where it was proven that
an officer engaged in such behaviour. The change in officers’
behaviour, in turn, may have influenced the actions of
individual citizens and mobs during the same periods, such
that they engaged less in violence and human-rights violations
of LGBTIQ+ people. In this way, the intervention by the
Inspector General of Police is a potential indication of the
power of police leadership to shape the conduct of police
members—and by extension the general public—in respecting
the constitutional rights of LGBTIQ+ Nigerians.
Nonetheless, based on the figure from 2019, it appears that
police leadership continues to struggle with bringing the
behaviour of police members in line with human-rights
standards and practices. The lack of consistency in this regard
could promote harmful social norms that advocate and
rationalize community violence against LGBTIQ+ people
(Human Rights Watch, 2016). Thus, LGBTIQ+ people may
not feel safe to reach out to the police for help when their
human rights are being violated (Human Rights Watch, 2016).
Further research is required with both police officers and
LGBTIQ+ people in Nigeria to understand the dynamics of
the police leadership and the changes in reporting.
7. Policy and social action responses to police
violence targeting LGBTIQ+ people in Nigeria
Policy drives much of the violence and sexual and human-
rights constraints experienced by LGBTIQ+ people (Beyrer,
2014). An immediate policy action that could be taken by the
Nigerian government, of course, would be to abolish the
SSMPA law. The removal of sections 214, 215 and 217 from
the Criminal Code Act, which criminalize same-sex sexual
practices, could follow. Finally, LGBTIQ+-specific rights
have not existed for over a century (The Federation of Nigeria,
1916). Laws need to be passed to protect LGBTIQ+ people
from discrimination. They need to be enacted so that persons,
including state and nonstate actors, could be prosecuted for
violating LGBTIQ+ people’s rights. Similar progressive
policies respecting the human rights of LGBTIQ+ people exist
in countries such as South Africa, which after becoming the
first African country to prohibit discrimination based on
sexual orientation and gender identity in its Constitution
(Mendos, 2019), celebrated its 30th annual Johannesburg
Pride parade in October 2019. South Africa was also the fifth
country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage (Masci,
Sciupac and Lipka, 2019) and to allow adoption by same-sex
couples (Thoreson, 2008). These LGBTIQ+-inclusive non-
discrimination policies affirm and protect the equal rights of
non-heterosexual people to life, liberty and security of the
person.
Policies can also specifically address police practices. The
government could issue an explicit directive to police
commissioners and senior officers, prohibiting all forms of
extortion, bribery, torture in police custody, violations of
privacy and corruption in the name of SSMPA. Such a
directive could instruct police officials to implement a hate-
crime recording and monitoring framework for reported acts
of violence against LGBTIQ+ people and require them to
investigate such cases without delay. Furthermore, as
measures of accountability the Ministry of Police Affairs
could share reports of police-reported LGBTIQ+ hate crimes
and investigations received from the Nigeria Police Force to
the police affairs, human rights and justice committees of the
National Assembly. While implementing policies does not
ensure changes in practice, it is a start. It could be buttressed
by trainings from community-based LGBTIQ+ and human-
rights groups and supported internally by police personnel
who champion LGBTIQ+ rights and human rights more
broadly.
Training and professional development opportunities
informed by stigma-reduction strategies could be provided to
legislators and policymakers, to prevent against further
enactment of punitive sexual-orientation and gender-identity
discrimination laws (Human Rights Watch, 2016). Topics in
such trainings might include LGBTIQ+ identities and
terminologies; the harmful impacts of stigma and
discrimination; the state of LGBTIQ+ rights in Nigeria and
around the world; and inclusive policies that promote the
rights and well-being of LGBTIQ+ people. In addition, the
trainings should be interactive and include in-person
professional workshops, case studies and role-plays or
simulations. These have been found to be more effective than
lecture-style trainings, because they emphasize adult learning
principles (Della, 2004; Morgan et al., 2000; Israel et al.,
2014). Trainings must include staff at the Ministry of Police
Affairs as well as police officers and cadets, to sensitize them
to the realities of LGBTIQ+ people. One study (Israel et al.,
2014) found that police who participated in a five-hour
training on LGBTQ issues increased their knowledge of the

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
45
challenges faced by LGBTQ people and reported improved
confidence using LGBTQ-affirming tactics (i.e. strategies
used in response to hate-motivated incidents directed at
someone who is LGBTQ). The Nigeria Police Force and the
Ministry of Police Affairs must envisage a new relationship
with the country’s LGBTIQ+ community. Through diverse
public engagement and promotional activities, they must seek
ways to gain the trust of LGBTIQ+ people and encourage
them to report acts of violence by state and nonstate actors,
with assurance that they will be taken seriously.
On the social action front, LGBTIQ+ organizations in
Nigeria recognize that the struggle for civil rights and equality
under the law in that country are connected to those of the
broader international community. Within the limits of legal
restrictions and much in the way seen in other countries where
LGBTIQ+ rights are protected by law, they make consistent
attempts to document the experiences of LGBTIQ+ people in
Nigeria, bring global attention to their situation and encourage
pressure from regional and international communities on the
Nigerian government to enact laws that protect the human
rights of LGBTIQ+ people (Adebanjo, 2015).
Local efforts from groups such as TIERS are also paving
the way towards a more inclusive society that supports the
liberation and visibility of LGBTIQ+ people in Nigeria. For
example, as part of its capacity-building initiative, TIERS
offers sensitization and empowerment skills training to
institutional stakeholders and community members to enhance
their knowledge about LGBTIQ+ people. The declining
support for SSMPA may be directly related to this effort—87
percent of Nigerians polled by NOIPolls in 2015 showed
support for SSMPA, compared to 92 percent in 2013 (Bisi
Alimi Foundation, TIERS and GLAAD, 2015).
Coalition building and broad-based mobilization with non-
LGBTIQ+-focused groups, including the 334 community-
based and non-governmental organizations affiliated with the
Human Rights Agenda Network (HRAN) based in Nigeria
(HRAN, 2019), are also integral to advancing LGBTIQ+
human rights. Such alliances can help to build solidarity and
catalyse respect for LGBTIQ+ people’s human rights by
collectivizing shared struggles (Beyrer, 2012). These
organizations could include HIV organizations providing
prevention and care services to the general population (e.g.
AIDS Healthcare Foundation Nigeria); women’s
organizations and others advocating gender equality (e.g.
Women’s Rights Advancement and Protection Alternative);
and disability organizations and advocacy groups promoting
the political and social rights of people with disabilities (e.g.
Centre for Citizens with Disabilities). Because some of these
collaborators may already be engaged in collaborative work
involving police leadership and/or have experience working
successfully with police on a common goal serving the public
interest, they could leverage existing relationships to advance
human rights for LGBTIQ+ Nigerians. Such advocacy could
result in the creation of a police-LGBTIQ+ liaison committee,
for example, similar to those operating in countries like
Canada (Kirkup, 2013), to help bridge the divide between the
police and members of LGBTIQ+ communities and foster
social engagement in shared activities.
A helpful starting place for building respectful and
equitable relationships can be practising cultural humility,
through self-reflection on one’s beliefs and cultural identities
(Tervalon and Murray-Garcia, 1998). Cultural humility
practices include self-awareness, openness to learning and
embracing complexity (Bennett and Gates, 2019). Dialogues
rooted in cultural humility can help people to engage in self-
reflection and self-critique on their own assumptions, biases
and values regarding LGBTIQ+ issues. Such dialogues could
then highlight the negative impacts of stigma and
discrimination on LGBTIQ+ people, their families and
Nigerian society to change stigmatizing attitudes and to
recognize LGBTIQ+ rights as human rights. There are more
than 250 ethnic tribes in Nigeria (Adedini et al., 2015), so no
two dialogues can be the same. However, dialogues in
community forums that allow individuals, groups and families
to share their experiences and learn from one another can help
to drive social change to improve the human rights of
LGBTIQ+ people (McAllister, 2015). As well, in this
approach, there should be a collaborative effort towards
alliance building with religious, social and cultural
commentators who are not necessarily members of the
LGBTIQ+ community but who have a broad-base, national
appeal in speaking against the stigma and discrimination of
LGBTIQ+ people (McAllister, 2015).
As the above strategies for social action to advance human
rights suggest, changing people’s negative attitudes,
behaviours and underlying values and biases against
LGBTIQ+ persons will require a sustained, amplified and
multifaceted effort. Human rights advocacy could leverage
international collaborations with LGBTIQ+ groups and
activists in other global contexts. International collaborators
could also engage in practices of cultural humility when
seeking to work with Nigerian LGBTIQ+ groups, which
would involve acknowledging the historical roots of
LGBTIQ+ stigma in Nigeria—and other former colonies—in
British colonial practices. Cultural humility for international
collaborators working with LGBTIQ+ Nigerians could
integrate Bennett and Gates’s (2019) recommendations to
explore power differences, resource needs, considerations of
diversity and of the whole person (beyond stigma) and to build
ongoing, respectful relationships that maximizes local
strengths, expertise and existing advocacy.
8. Limitations
Study limitations are worth noting. Our research relied on
available administrative data from TIERS and partner

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
46
organizations covering six reporting periods between January
2014 and November 2019. The data set is cross-sectional,
precluding understanding of causality, and we are limited in
variables to assess, as labels were predefined. Qualitative data
to enhance deeper understanding of the issue are also lacking.
The Nigeria Police Force is key to the safety of LGBTIQ+
people but is often overlooked in the process of finding
solutions to violence perpetrated by police officers. Research
could explore officers’ views of internal and external changes
needed to improve their relationships with, and perceptions of,
police service quality for LGBTIQ+ people. In addition,
ongoing grassroots activism challenging dominant norms of
sexual orientation and gender identity has been helpful in
slowly shifting societal attitudes towards LGBTIQ+ people in
Nigeria (Bisi Alimi Foundation, TIERS and GLAAD, 2015).
However, this change has not trickled down into all public
institutions. Little progress has been made in the delivery of
justice and in advancing equality for LGBTIQ+ people under
the law. Thus, another possible research direction is to explore
barriers to grassroots LGBTIQ+ organizations activism
effecting policy change and policing reforms in Nigeria.
9. Conclusions
The current research synthesized serial cross-sectional
data to produce a general picture of the experience of
LGBTIQ+ Nigerians with the police. The presented data
showed that, since the introduction of SSMPA, human-rights
violations and abuse rose by 214 percent. The police are
involved in several actions that compromise the safety and
well-being of LGBTIQ+ Nigerians. Arbitrary arrest and
unlawful detention, invasion of privacy, physical assault and
battery and blackmail and extortion were the top human-rights
violations and abuses reported among police state actors.
These findings have important implications for policing in a
democratic state such as Nigeria. Police legitimacy—that is,
citizens’ trust in the police—risks being eroded when sworn
officers participate in and perpetrate violence against
LGBTIQ+ members of society. Their actions, though
encouraged by the SSMPA and other existing discriminatory
laws, undermine the fundamental rights of LGBTIQ+
Nigerians to a life free of violence and abuse as stipulated in
the aforementioned legal regimes. Additionally, the unequal
application of the rule of law means that LGBTIQ+ Nigerians
are exposed to human-rights violations and abuse with no
recourse to justice or support from the police. Addressing this
issue is paramount to ensuring the safety and well-being of
LGBTIQ+ Nigerians and to promoting a climate that support
survivors to come forward in reporting their abuse to the
police.
References
Abimboye, M. (2016) Inspector General of Police bans illegal
accessing of mobile phones. Available at:
https://www.legit.ng/685255-inspector-general-police-bans-
illegal-accessing-mobile-phones.html (Accessed: 26 August
2019).
Adebanjo, A. T. (2015) ‘Culture, morality and the law:
Nigeria’s anti-gay law in perspective’, International Journal
of Discrimination and the Law, 15(4), pp. 256–270.
Adedini, S. A., Odimegwu, C., Imasiku, E. N. S. and
Ononokpono, D. N. (2015) ‘Ethnic differentials in under-five
mortality in Nigeria’, Ethnicity & Health, 20(2), pp. 145–162.
Adeoye, A. (2019) Nigerian police officer tells gays: leave
country or face prosecution. Available at:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/health/nigeria-police-gay-
prosecution-warning/index.html (Accessed: 16 February
2019).
Alemika, E. E. O. and Chukwuma, I. C. (2000) Police-
community violence in Nigeria. Available at:
http://new.cleen.org/police-violence.pdf (Accessed: 6
September 2019).
Amnesty International (2013) Making love a crime:
criminalization of same-sex conduct in sub-Saharan Africa.
Available at:
https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/8000/afr010
012013en.pdf (Accessed: 17 January 2019).
Angeles, L. C. and Roberton, J. (2020, January-February)
‘Empathy and inclusive public safety in the city: examining
LGBTQ2+ voices and experiences of intersectional
discrimination’, Women’s Studies International Forum, 78.
doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2019.102313
Arisukwu, O. C. (2012) ‘Policing trends in Nigeria since
independence (1960–2012)’, The Police Journal, 85(2), pp.
151–159.
Bass, K. G. and Lee, J. (2015) Silenced voices, threatened
lives: the impact of Nigeria’s anti-LGBTI law on freedom of
expression. Available at:
https://www.bisialimifoundation.org/site/bisialimifoundation
/assets/pdf/bisi-alimi-nigeriareport_final_highres.pdf
(Accessed: 17 January 2019).
Bennett, B. and Gates, T. G. (2019) ‘Teaching cultural
humility for social workers serving LGBTQI Aboriginal
communities in Australia’, Social Work Education, 38(5), pp.
604–617.
Beyrer, C. (2012) ‘LGBT Africa: a social justice movement
emerges in the era of HIV’, SAHARA-J: Journal of Social
Aspects of HIV/AIDS, 9(3), pp. 177–179.
Beyrer, C. (2014) ‘Pushback: the current wave of anti-
homosexuality laws and impacts on health’, PLoS Medicine,
11(6), e1001658. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001658

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
47
Bisi Alimi Foundation, The Initiative for Equal Rights, and
GLAAD (2015) A closer look at Nigeria: attitudes on lesbian,
gay, and bisexual people. Available at:
https://www.bisialimifoundation.org/site/bisialimifoundation
/assets/pdf/bisi-alimi-nigeria-report_v3.pdf (Accessed: 19
January 2019).
Broberg, M. and Sano, H.-O. (2018) ‘Strengths and
weaknesses in a human rights-based approach to international
development – an analysis of a rights-based approach to
development assistance based on practical experiences’, The
International Journal of Human Rights, 22(5), pp. 664–680.
Carroll, A. and Mendos, L. R. (2017) State-sponsored
homophobia: A world survey of sexual orientation laws—
criminalisation, protection and recognition. 12th ed.
Available at:
https://ilga.org/downloads/2017/ILGA_State_Sponsored_Ho
mophobia_2017_WEB.pdf (Accessed: 19 January 2019).
Carter, D. (2004) Stonewall: the riots that sparked the gay
revolution. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Dario, L. M., Fradella, H. F., Verhagen, M. and Parry, M. M.
(2020) ‘Assessing LGBT people’s perceptions of police
legitimacy’, Journal of Homosexuality, 67(7), pp. 885–915.
Della, B. C. (2004) ‘Nontraditional training systems: realizing
the effectiveness of an agency’s most valuable resource’, FBI
Law Enforcement Bulletin, 73(6), pp. 1–9.
Dentato, M. P. (ed.) (2018) Social work practice with the
LGBTQ community: the intersection of history, health, mental
health, and policy factors. New York: Oxford University
Press.
The Federation of Nigeria (1916) Criminal Code Act.
Available at:
https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/ng/ng025en.pdf
(Accessed: 17 January 2019).
Givens, L. M. (ed.) (2008) The SAGE encyclopedia of
qualitative research methods. Volumes 1 and 2. Thousand
Oaks: SAGE.
Giwa, S. and Jackman, M. C. (2020) Missing persons
investigation and police interaction with racialized people
who identify as LGBTQ2S+. Independent Civilian Review
into Missing Person Investigations. Toronto, ON: Toronto
Police Services Board.
Herek, G. M. (1989) ‘Hate crimes against lesbians and gay
men: issues for research and policy’, American Psychologist,
44(6), pp. 948–955.
Hodge, J. P. and Sexton, L. (2018). ‘Examining the blue line
in the rainbow: the interactions and perceptions of law
enforcement among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
queer communities’, Police Practice and Research: An
International Journal. doi:10.1080/15614263.2018.1526686
Hsieh, H. F. and Shannon, S. E. (2005) ‘Three approaches to
qualitative content analysis’, Qualitative Health Research,
15(9), pp. 1277–1288.
Human Rights Agenda Network (2019) Human rights agenda
network membership list. Available at:
http://hrannigeria.org/members-list (Accessed: 30 October
2019).
Human Rights Watch (2005) ‘Rest in pieces’: police torture
and deaths in custody in Nigeria. Available at:
https://www.hrw.org/report/2005/07/27/rest-pieces/police-
torture-and-deaths-custody-nigeria (Accessed: 26 August
2019).
Human Rights Watch (2010) ‘Everyone’s in on the game’:
corruption and human rights abuses by the Nigeria Police
Force. Available at:
https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/08/17/everyones-
game/corruption-and-human-rights-abuses-nigeria-police-
force (Accessed: 26 August 2019).
Human Rights Watch (2016) ‘Tell me where I can be safe’:
the impact of Nigeria’s Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act.
Available at:
https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/nigeria101
6_web.pdf (Accessed: 17 January 2019).
Ife, J. (2012) Human rights and social work: towards rights-
based practice. 3rd edn. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Ikuteyijo, L. and Rotimi, K. (2012) ‘Community partnership
in policing: the Nigerian experience’, The Police Journal,
85(2), pp. 123–131.
The Initiative for Equal Rights (2015) 2015 report on human
rights violations based on real or perceived sexual orientation
and gender identity in Nigeria. Available at:
https://www.theinitiativeforequalrights.org/resources1/2015-
Report-on-Human-Rights-Violations-Based-on-Real-or-
Percieved-Sexual-Orientation-and-Gender-Identity-in-
Nigeria-.pdf (Accessed: 19 January 2019).
The Initiative for Equal Rights (2016) 2016 human rights
violations report based on real or perceived sexual
orientation and gender identity in Nigeria. Available at:
https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/resources/ (Accessed:
19 January 2019).
The Initiative for Equal Rights (2017) 2017 human rights
violations report based on sexual orientation and gender
identity expression in Nigeria. Available at:
https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/12/2017-Human-Rights-report-.pdf
(Accessed: 19 January 2019).
The Initiative for Equal Rights (2018) 2018 human rights
violations report based on real or perceived sexual
orientation and gender identity in Nigeria. Available at:
https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/wp-
content/uploads/2018/12/2018-Human-Rights-Report.pdf
(Accessed: 19 January 2019).

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
48
The Initiative for Equal Rights (2019) 2019 human rights
violations report based on real or perceived sexual
orientation and gender identity in Nigeria. Available at:
https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/12/2019-Human-Rights-Violations-
Reports-Based-on-SOGI.pdf (Accessed: 4 January 2020).
Israel, T., Harkness, A., Delucio, K., Ledbetter, J. N. and
Avellar, T. R. (2014) ‘Evaluation of police training on
LGBTQ issues: knowledge, interpersonal apprehension, and
self-efficacy’, Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology,
29(2), pp. 57–67.
Karimu, O. O. (2014) ‘Nigeria Police Force performance in
crime prevention and control: an assessment’, International
Journal of Academic Research and Reflection, 2(4), pp. 81–
88.
Kennedy, C. E., Baral, S. D., Fielding-Miller, R., Adams, D.,
Dludlu, P., Sithole, B., Fonner, V. A., Mnisi, Z. and Kerrigan,
D. (2013) ‘‘They are human beings, they are Swazi’:
intersecting stigmas and the positive health, dignity and
prevention needs of HIV-positive men who have sex with men
in Swaziland’, Journal of the International AIDS Society,
16(4Suppl 3), pp. 18749.
Kirkup, K. (2013) Best practices in policing and LGBTQ
communities in Ontario. Available at:
http://www.oacp.on.ca/Userfiles/Files/NewAndEvents/OAC
P%20LGBTQ%20final%20Nov2013.pdf (Accessed: 30
October 2019).
Mallory, C., Hasenbush, A. and Sears, B. (2015)
Discrimination and harassment by law enforcement officers in
the LGBT community. Available at:
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-
content/uploads/LGBT-Discrimination-and-Harassment-in-
Law-Enforcement-March-2015.pdf (Accessed: 16 June
2020).
Marks, S. M. (2006) ‘Global recognition of human rights for
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people’, Health and
Human Rights, 9(1), pp. 33–42.
Masci, D., Sciupac, E. and Lipka, M. (2019) Same-sex
marriage around the world. Available at:
https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/gay-marriage-around-
the-world/ (Accessed: 30 October 2019).
McAllister, J. (2015) ‘LGBT activism and ‘traditional values’:
promoting dialogue through Indigenous cultural values in
Botswana’ in Sandfort, T., Simenel, F., Mwachiro, K. and
Reddy, V. (eds.) Boldly queer: African perspectives on same-
sex sexuality and gender diversity. The Hague: HIVOS, pp.
41–48.
Mendos, L. R. (2019) State-sponsored homophobia.13th ed.
Available at:
https://ilga.org/downloads/ILGA_State_Sponsored_Homoph
obia_2019_light.pdf (Accessed: 6 September 2019).
Miles-Johnson, T. (2013) ‘LGBTI variations in crime
reporting: how sexual identity influences decisions to call the
cops’, SAGE Open, 3(2), pp. 1–15.
Morgan, B., Morgan, F., Foster, V. and Kolbert, J. (2000)
‘Promoting the moral and conceptual development of law
enforcement trainees: a deliberate psychological educational
approach’, Journal of Moral Education, 29(2), pp. 203–218.
Murray, S. O. and Roscoe, W. (eds.) (1998) Boy-wives and
female husbands: studies in African homosexualities. New
York: Palgrave.
Nyanzi, S. (2014) ‘Queer pride and protest: a reading of the
bodies at Uganda’s first gay beach pride’, Signs: Journal of
Women in Culture and Society, 40(1), pp. 36–40.
Okereke, C. (2019) Duped through dating apps: queer love in
the time of homophobia. Available at:
https://africanarguments.org/2019/03/26/duped-through-
dating-apps-queer-love-in-the-time-of-homophobia/
(Accessed: 15 June 2020).
Poteat, T., Diouf, D., Drame, F. M., Ndaw, M., Traore, C.,
Dhaliwal, M., Beyrer, C. and Baral, S. (2011) ‘HIV risk
among MSM in Senegal: a qualitative rapid assessment of the
impact of enforcing laws that criminalize same sex practices’,
PLoS ONE, 6(12), e28760. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028760
Premium Times (n.d.) Nigeria Police Code of Conduct.
Available at:
https://www.premiumtimesng.com/docs_download/NIGERI
APOLICECODEOFCONDUCT.pdf (Accessed: 12 April
2020).
Refworld (2019) Nigeria: Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition)
Act, 2013. Available at:
https://www.refworld.org/docid/52f4d9cc4.html (Accessed:
19 September 2019).
Reichert, E. (ed.) (2007) Challenges in human rights: a social
work perspective. New York: Columbia University Press.
Schwartz, S. R., Nowak, R. G., Orazulike, I., Keshinro, B.,
Ake, J., Kennedy, S., Njoku, O., Blattner, W. A., Charurat, M.
E. and Baral, S. D. (2015) ‘The immediate effect of the Same-
Sex Marriage Prohibition Act on stigma, discrimination, and
engagement on HIV prevention and treatment services in men
who have sex with men in Nigeria: analysis of prospective
data from the TRUST cohort’, The Lancet HIV, 2(7), pp.
e299–e306.
Semugoma, P., Nemande, S. and Baral, S. D. (2012) ‘The
irony of homophobia in Africa’, The Lancet, 380(9839), pp.
312–314.
Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) (2014) Expanded
criminalisation of homosexuality in Uganda: a flawed
narrative. Available at:
https://sexualminoritiesuganda.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/07/SMUG-alternative-to-
criminalisation.pdf (Accessed: 19 January 2019).
Sogunro, A. (2017) Discriminating against persons based on
sexual orientation and gender identity expression in Nigeria.
Available at: https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/12/Compenduim-of-Law-.pdf
(Accessed: 18 January 2019).

Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1) Giwa et al
49
Taft, P. and Haken, N. (2015) Violence in Nigeria: patterns
and trends. Cham: Springer.
Tamuno, T. N. (1970) The police in modern Nigeria, 1861–
1965: origins, development and role. Ibadan: University of
Ibadan Press.
Tervalon, M. and Murray-García, J. (1998) ‘Cultural humility
versus cultural competence: a critical distinction in defining
physician training outcomes in multicultural education’,
Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 9(2),
pp. 117–125.
Thoreson, R. R. (2008) ‘Somewhere over the rainbow nation:
gay, lesbian and bisexual activism in South Africa’, Journal
of Southern African Studies, 34(3), pp. 679–697.
UNDG Human Rights Working Group (2003) The human
rights based approach to development cooperation towards a
common understanding among UN agencies. Available at:
https://unsdg.un.org/resources/human-rights-based-approach-
development-cooperation-towards-common-understanding-
among-un (Accessed: 8 April 2020).
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights (OHCHR) (2018) The role of the United Nations in
combatting discrimination and violence against lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender and intersex people. Available at:
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Discrimination/LG
BT/UN_LGBTI_Summary.pdf (Accessed: 18 January 2019).
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Available at:
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
(Accessed: 8 April 2020).
The Yogyakarta Principles (2007) Principles on the
application of international human rights law in relation to
sexual orientation and gender identity. Available at:
http://data.unaids.org/pub/manual/2007/070517_yogyakarta_
principles_en.pdf (Accessed: 8 April 2020).
Zahn, R., Grosso, A., Scheibe, A., Bekker, L.-G., Ketende, S.,
Dausab, F., Lipinge, S., Beyrer, C., Trapance, G. and Baral, S.
(2016) ‘Human rights violations among men who have sex
with men in southern Africa: comparisons between legal
contexts’, PLoS ONE, 11(1), e0147156. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147156
Zumve, S. I. (2012) ‘Community policing in contemporary
Nigeria: a synthesis of models’, Journal of Educational and
Social Research, 2(9), pp. 132–139.