• Funding resumes after 2023 suspension tied to Uganda’s anti-LGBT legislation
• Three new projects approved in social protection, education, and displacement
• Bank cites “satisfactory” safeguards to mitigate law’s negative impact 

The World Bank has resumed financing operations in Uganda, two years after suspending new funding in response to the country’s anti-LGBT legislation. The announcement was made on June 5, following board approval of three new projects focused on social protection, education, and the management of forced displacement.

In August 2023, the Bank froze all new funding for Uganda after the enactment of the Anti-Homosexuality Act (AHA), a law that introduced severe penalties—including life imprisonment and, in certain cases, the death penalty—for offenses linked to homosexuality. The law was broadly supported within Uganda’s parliament and society but drew strong international condemnation.

A World Bank spokesperson told Reuters that the institution has since implemented measures “to mitigate against potential harm from the law,” and considers these safeguards “satisfactory,” clearing the way for renewed financial engagement.

The newly approved projects include support for vulnerable populations and refugees, reflecting Uganda’s status as one of the largest refugee-hosting countries in Africa. Uganda remains a major recipient of World Bank aid, particularly in sectors such as infrastructure and public service development.

Despite global criticism, the anti-homosexuality law continues to enjoy strong domestic support. Enacted in May 2023, it criminalizes what it terms the “promotion” of homosexuality and imposes the death penalty for "aggravated homosexuality"—including cases involving persons with disabilities or the transmission of a serious disease.

Similar laws have been adopted or debated in several African countries, including Ghana, Nigeria, and Kenya. Critics of foreign pressure, including aid suspensions and visa restrictions, argue that such measures amount to political coercion. Some commentators frame these actions as a form of neo-colonialism, asserting that African states should retain the right to legislate according to their own cultural and social values.