Ukraine: draft law no. 8711 on “homosexual propaganda” violates human rights

Ukraine: draft law no. 8711 on “homosexual propaganda” violates human rights

The Verkhovna Rada, the Ukrainian parliament, voted on 2 October 2012 in favor of a bill that would ban “homosexual propaganda”. The ICJ and ILGA-Europe have condemned the draft law and called on Ukrainian authorities not to adopt it. Two hundred and eighty-nine out of 450 members of parliament supported the bill, which is now expected to move for a second round of reading in parliament later this month.

The organisations are deeply concerned about the impact of Draft Law no. 8711 on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Ukraine as well as the rights of everyone to the freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association. ICJ and ILGA-Europe urge the Ukrainian parliament to withdraw the bill from its agenda and call on the Chair of the Parliament and the President, who would both need to sign the bill in order for it to become law, to speak out against it.

The bill would modify several existing laws in Ukraine, including criminal law, and introduce sanctions for the import, production and distribution of products that would “promote” homosexuality. “Promotion of homosexuality” is itself undefined.  “If voted into law, it would lead to the further marginalisation of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans community in the country and would limit the work of human rights defenders,” Evelyne Paradis, Executive Director of ILGA-Europe said.

 ILGA-Europe and the ICJ believe that Draft Law no. 8711 is incompatible with international human rights law. First it is so vague that it fails to conform to the requirement that restrictions must be provided for by law. Under the draft law, it is impossible for an individual to determine what kind of expression is banned. Second, the asserted reasons for the “homosexual propaganda” ban fail the tests of proportionality and necessity.  In other words, the restriction serves no permissible purpose. Third and finally, the homosexual propaganda ban discriminates against LGBT people by prohibiting public discourse on issues that matter to LGBT lives. “Restrictions on rights may not be discriminatory, and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is clearly prohibited under international law,” said Alli Jernow, Senior Legal Adviser of the International Commission of Jurists.

The EU should raise these developments in the context of the monitoring of the implementation of the Visa Liberalisation Action Plan. Parliamentary discussion of this law clearly demonstrates that progress is stalled.  If the bill passes a second reading, further negotiations with Ukraine should be delayed or ultimately suspended.  We also call on the Council of Europe to unequivocally denounce Draft Law no. 8711 in representations to the Ukrainian government.

 The law is expected to be discussed at a second hearing in the coming weeks. After that the Chair of the Parliament and the President would need to sign the bill before it would become official law.

ICJ and ILGA-Europe earlier this year issued a joint briefing paper on “homosexual propaganda bans” that have been enacted or proposed in Europe and other Eastern European countries.

Photo credit:  Insight NGO

Challenge to homosexual propaganda ban in St. Petersburg court

Challenge to homosexual propaganda ban in St. Petersburg court

Nikolai Alekseyev was convicted under the new homosexual propaganda ban and he is currently challenging the constitutionality of the law. The ICJ filed an amicus brief.

The activist was arrested and fined for holding up a sign quoting a famous Soviet era actress, who said: “Homosexuality is not a perversion. Field hockey and ice ballet are.”

The ICJ brief argues that the St. Petersburg law violates the right to freedom of expression, guaranteed by both the ICCPR and the European Convention on Human Rights. The homosexual propaganda bans are not only vague, they also fail the tests of proportionality and necessity and discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, all contrary to human rights law.

The case is currently pending.  A hearing scheduled for 27 September 2012 was postponed due to the recusal of one of the judges.

For more information on the homosexual propaganda bans, see the ILGA-Europe ICJ briefing paper.

Russia-homosexual propaganda ban challenged-ICJ Amicus Brief-2012 (full text in PDF)

Russia-homosexual propaganda ban challenged-ICJ Amicus Brief-2012-ru (full text in PDF)

Taddeucci and McCall V Italy: third party intervention before the European Court

Taddeucci and McCall V Italy: third party intervention before the European Court

Taddeucci, a national of Italy, and McCall, a national of New Zealand, are an unmarried same-sex couple who moved together to Italy to be close to Taddeucci’s family. But McCall was denied a residency visa.

The visa was denied on the grounds that he was neither a “spouse” nor a family member of an Italian citizen.  The Italian courts refused to recognize their relationship, forcing the couple to leave Italy in order to be able to live together.

They applied to the European Court, arguing that their rights to non-discrimination and to the enjoyment of family life had been violated.

The ICJ, ILGA-Europe and NELFA submitted a joint third party intervention arguing that conditioning residency on marital status constitutes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, given that in many countries same-sex couples are denied access to marriage, and that unmarried couples are families regardless of formal legal status.  As families, their relationship should be leally recognised and protected by the state.

Italy-Taddeucci_&_McCall_v_Italy-legal submission-2012-Eng (text in PDF)

Translate »