** The resumption of financing by the World Bank in Uganda: Development support or a risk for human rights? **
For the past two years, the World Bank had suspended its loans to Uganda, an unprecedented decision which followed the adoption of one of the most repressive laws in the world towards the LGBTQ community. This legislation, which entered into force in 2023, attracted a large international condemnation because of its severe provisions, including sanctions that can go as far as the death penalty for certain homosexual acts. In this context, the resumption of financing by the World Bank raises complex questions.
### Historical and social context
Uganda has a long history of discrimination against LGBTQ people, exacerbated by social policies and often hostile political discourses. Although human rights groups have reported a spectacular increase in abuses, such as evictions and physical violence since the adoption of this law, the Ugandan government has persisted in its position. Thus, the return of the World Bank to financial support after having frozen its funds could be perceived as a strengthening of state structures, potentially to the detriment of vulnerable communities.
## Mitigation measures: a glimmer of hope or an illusion?
The World Bank said that it had developed “mitigation measures” supposed to guarantee that its projects harm the LGBTQ people as little as possible. However, this approach raises questions about their real effectiveness in such a hostile legislative environment. The worried people wonder if these measures will be enough to protect the rights of individuals during the execution of funded projects. The question then arises: how to guarantee that financial aid is not diverted to support discriminatory practices?
The experience of other countries shows that human rights commitments can sometimes be insufficient in the face of static biomedical and tenacious socio -political structures. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa, financing initiatives have been implemented without taking full account of socio-cultural realities, thus resulting in defensive reactions from governments.
### Ethical responsibility of the World Bank
The decision to lift loans calls for a reflection on the role of the World Bank as an institution of development. On the one hand, this organization is faced with the need to support infrastructure and development projects in Uganda, which are of vital importance for the population. On the other, the ethical question concerning the respect of human rights arises with insistent. What are the implications for the continuation of the financing of a country which applies such an oppressive policy towards part of its population?
### Potential consequences
The resumption of financial assistance could, in theory, contribute to economic development, but it could also strengthen a legal environment in which human rights violations continue without obstacle. Human rights organizations, such as Fatshimetrics, have already expressed concerns indicating that the protection measures implemented by the World Bank may not be sufficient to counter the effects of the discriminatory laws in force.
### In search of balance
Faced with this situation, it seems crucial to open a constructive dialogue between the World Bank, the Ugandan government and civil society organizations. This dialogue could make it possible to envisage development which integrates respect for human rights instead of seeing them as obstacles to economic growth. Note that an interdisciplinary approach involving local actors, both economic and social, could lead to creative and sustainable solutions, where economic development would be combined with fundamental rights.
### Conclusion
The World Bank’s decision to resume funding in Uganda marks a pivotal moment. By implementing mitigation measures for LGBTQ people, the institution hopes to sail in a complex context. However, it is essential that this recovery is accompanied by a vigilant attention to the field, following the implications of projects funded on vulnerable communities, in order to ensure that international aid does not contribute to increased oppression. Collective responsibility, both donors and governments, remains a major imperative to build a future where development and human rights can thrive side by side.