Paper short abstract:

Protected by an international human rights mechanism premised on self-exposure for access, LGBT refugees in Kenya must also practice discretion to avoid local criminalisation. In this paper, I consider what happens when homophobia and homonationalism come to define parallel legal regimes.

Paper long abstract:

The current literature in queer migration tends to critically frame movement, from the ‘barbaric’ Global South to the ‘enlightened’ Global North, in terms of homonationalism. Perhaps best described by David Murray (2020) as the ‘queer migration to liberation nation narrative’, this process is premised on the supposed active repudiation by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) refugees of their countries of origin’s (post)colonial national cultures as the source of their persecution while embracing the enlightened sexual/gender norms of their liberators through being ‘out and proud’ (and grateful). In 1991, the war in Somalia brought the Kenyan refugee system to the brink of total collapse. In order to manage the crisis, the Kenyan state contracted the UNHCR to adjudicate asylum claims on the grounds set out in the 1951 Refugee Convention. In the wake of Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Act 2014, this has included extending refugee protection to LGBT claimants on the basis of persecution as members of ‘a particular social group’. However, local Kenyan law continues to criminalise LGBT people. Over 1000 LGBT refugees in Kenya thus find themselves in the peculiar position of being protected by an international human rights mechanism premised on self-exposure for access, while also having to practice discretion to avoid local criminal prosecution. Drawing on research with transgender refugees in Kenya, I consider what happens to the ‘liberation nation narrative’ when homophobia and homonationalism come to define parallel legal regimes