Lawyer Asks Court to Scrap Law on Mandatory Marital Sex

A Lawyer and human rights activist, Steven Kalali, has petitioned the High Court in Kampala, challenging a law that allows courts to compel a husband or wife to return to their partner and offer them sex.

Kalali argues that Section 20 of the Divorce Act, which provides for the restitution of conjugal rights, violates fundamental rights to dignity, privacy, and freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment.

In his petition before the Civil Division of the High Court, Kalali says it is unconstitutional and demeaning for a court to order someone to live with or have sexual relations with a person against their will. He is representing himself in the case, naming the Attorney General as the respondent.

“It would be barbaric and unrealistic to compel two unwilling parties to perform a sexual act against their will, contrary to the Bill of Rights, which courts are mandated to protect,” Kalali notes in his petition.

The contested section of the Divorce Act was inherited from colonial legislation and allows one spouse to petition the court for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights when their partner refuses to live with or be intimate with them.

Kalali contends that such a decree effectively sanctions forced sex and slavery within marriage, both of which are contrary to Uganda’s Constitution and international human rights norms. He adds that no Ugandan court has ever successfully enforced such a decree, making it redundant, unrealistic, and unenforceable in practice.

“The remedy constitutes hardship to supervise sexual intercourse by the court. Its enforcement is impossible, for neither court nor its staff nor bailiff can witness or assist in executing such a decree,” the petition reads.

In his affidavit, Kalali insists that intimacy and companionship are inherently psychological and consensual acts, which cannot be restored through legal force. He says compelling an unwilling partner to resume cohabitation or engage in sex amounts to psychological torture and a violation of bodily autonomy.

“Sex and companionship cannot be commanded by court orders,” he asserts. “Forcing a person to provide human company without consent is inhuman and degrading.”

Kalali’s petition also draws attention to Uganda’s obligations under international human rights treaties, including those protecting the right to dignity, privacy, and freedom from cruel or degrading treatment. He urges the court to strike down the outdated law to align Uganda’s legal system with modern values of autonomy and mutual respect within marriage.

The petition is supported by lawyer Mary Nankabirwa, who, in her affidavit, describes the concept of restitution of conjugal rights as archaic and disconnected from the realities of modern relationships. She argues that forcing estranged partners to cohabit or engage in intimacy deepens trauma and exposes especially women to continued domestic violence and emotional abuse.

Nankabirwa further warns that such orders could trigger violence or unintended consequences such as forced pregnancies and unsafe abortions, particularly in cases where a woman is coerced back into an unwanted relationship. Having practised law for years, she says she has never seen a decree of conjugal rights enforced, calling it “vague, impractical, and a relic of colonial law.”

Kalali and Nankabirwa both maintain that marriage should remain a voluntary union grounded in mutual respect and consent. They argue that keeping such colonial-era provisions on Uganda’s statute books undermines the country’s commitment to human rights, gender equality, and modern justice.

Kalali now seeks declarations that the provision is unconstitutional, vague, and inconsistent with Uganda’s constitutional values. He also asks the High Court to order the Attorney General to take steps toward its repeal, and to issue a permanent injunction stopping courts or state agencies from issuing or enforcing any decree of restitution of conjugal rights.

The petition has not yet been assigned to a judge, and the High Court is expected to summon the Attorney General to file the government’s defence in the coming days.