Jul 5, 2020 | News
The ICJ hosted live interviews with human rights defenders from Asia, Africa and Latin America to mark Pride Month, which is celebrated during the month of June in various parts of the world. The interviews took place from 22 June to 3 July 2020.
In total, 13 human rights defenders from 11 countries spanning three continents, who are working to uphold the human rights of of lesbians, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) individuals, were interviewed.
The interviews discussed existing legal systems that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression (SOGIE) and the impacts of COVID-19 on existing activism, .
The interviews aimed to provide quick snapshots of different country and regional contexts and a platform for LGBT activist voices on the varied and devastating impacts of COVID-19 on LGBT people.
Debunking cultural myths
In many countries around the world where people are criminalized or stigmatized as a result of harmful steretypes and prejudice on the grounds of their real or imputed SOGIE, public discourse tend to cast LGBT relationships and identities as threats to culture, religion or beliefs and the future of the nation. These interviews endeavoured to interrogate and debunk cultural and regional myths surrounding SOGIE identities as ‘Western’ constructs.
In a response to homosexuality being said to be ‘unAfrican’, Kutlwano Pearl Magashula, executive officer for program functions at the Other Foundation from Botswana, said:
“Utterances that suggest that homosexuality is unAfrican enforce stigma and violence and serve to carve deep roots in the consciousness of people around the world that breed discrimination and treating people differently.”
Devastating impacts of COVID-19 on LGBT people
Important impacts of COVID-19 on LGBT people were highlighted by different speakers, ranging from a loss of livelihood, vulnerability to violence at home and in public spaces, as well as challenges in accessing healthcare.
“There is violence against transgender women sex workers. The police arrest them, yell at them and shoot at them with rubber bullets. This is a recent episode here in Colombia and it is terrible. If they don’t work, they don’t have money to buy food and pay the rent. It is a difficult scenario,” Dejusticia researcher Santiago Carvajal Casas from Columbia said.
Pre-existing inequalities and landmark wins
Personal experiences of ‘life after’ important wins from around the world were shared. Some important gains from the decriminalization of consensual same-sex sexual relationships in Botswana and India, as well as the recent legalization of same-sex marriage in Taiwan must be celebrated. However, many of these wins may remain illusory for people who have been discriminated against on the basis of class, caste and other status inequality, or are without social support, especially in the face of COVID-19.
“What we really need is social protection, we need a safety-net for all those who are close to the poverty line and who are likely to go below the poverty line because of disasters like the COVID-19 epidemic or catastrophic out of pocket healthcare expenditures. We definitely need accessible healthcare for everyone and livelihood.” – Dr. L Ramakrishnan, public health professional and Vice-President of SAATHII, India
Watch the Facebook lives below:
Kutlwano Pearl Magashula, Executive Officer for Program Functions at the Other Foundation, on the board of LEGABIBO as the vice-chairperson and co-founder of the autonomous feminist collective Black Queer DocX (Botswana)
Busisiwe Deyi, Commissioner of CGE/ Lecturer of Jurisprudence (South Africa)
Letlhogonolo Mokgoroane, lawyer activist and podcaster (South Africa)
Lini Zurlia, advocacy officer at ASEAN SOGIE Caucus (ASEAN/Indonesia)
Yee Shan, member of Diversity Malaysia (Malaysia)
Sirasak Chaited, human rights campaigner, LGBT+ and sex worker rights activist (Thailand)
Santiago Carvajal Casas, Dejusticia researcher (Colombia)
Sih-Cheng (Sean) Du, Director of Policy Advocacy at Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBTQ+) Hotline Association (Taiwan)
Neeli Rana, transgender activist (Pakistan)
Riska Carolina, The Indonesian Plan Parenthood Association (IPPA) member (Indonesia)
Hla Myat Tun, Deputy Director from Colors Rainbow and Co-Director at &PROUD (Myanmar)
Dr. L Ramakrishnan, Vice President Saathii, activist, public health professional (India)
Nigel Mpemba Patel, Associate editor at the South African Journal on Human Rights and research consultant at ILGA World (Malawi)
***
Cover photo by Violaine Biex-Colors Rainbow, Myanmar.
Mar 31, 2020
Today, on the International Transgender Day of Visibility (TDOV), the ICJ has released a briefing paper on Pakistan’s Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2018.
The briefing paper analyzes some of the more salient provisions of the Act in light of Pakistan’s obligations under international human rights law.
The paper specifically addresses: the definition of transgender people provided in the act; the procedures for legal gender recognition stipulated by the law; the provisions on anti-discrimination and harassment; the new criminal offence related to begging; and the adequacy and effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms, among other issues.
“The passage of the law is a testament to the hard work and struggle of the Pakistani transgender and queer communities, as well as the support and solidarity offered at different points by other social and civil society groups,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“However, for the promise of the law to be realized in a manner that fully respects the human rights of transgender people, it is essential that this process does not end with the enactment of the legislation, and that authorities take an inclusive and proactive approach towards its enforcement.”
Under the law, transgender people have the right to have all their official documents changed and reissued in line with their self-identified gender, and the Act provides for legal recognition of gender identity as a matter of right without any medical or diagnostic requirements.
“This a crucial improvement in the legal status of transgender people in Pakistan, making the Act one of the most far-reaching in the region, if not world over,” added Rawski.
“Other countries that are grappling with similar legislation have much to learn from how the Pakistan’s Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2018 has responded to the question of legal gender recognition.”
However, there remain a number of limitations and omissions in the law, which could hamper the full protection of the human rights of transgender people in the country.
Some of them include: the conflation of transgender and intersex identities; the criminalization of “employing” or “using” transgender people for begging, despite evidence that such laws are used to harass and blackmail transgender people; the delay in formulating rules under the law to ensure its effective implementation; and the lack of adequate enforcement mechanisms.
In addition, it is of concern that other discriminatory legal provisions that violate the rights of transgender people, such as section 375 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), which defines rape in an exclusionary and gendered manner, namely, by making it a crime that can only be committed by a man against a woman, and section 377 of the PPC, which criminalizes “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” are still in force.
The analysis in this paper provides some guidance to policy makers and members of parliament on how the law can be further strengthened.
The recommendations should be implemented, both at national and provincial levels, to make the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act the more consistent with Pakistan’s obligations under international law.
Contact:
Frederick Rawski (Bangkok), ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ Legal Advisor (South Asia) t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org
Download
Briefing Paper Pakistan-Transgender-Advocacy-Analysis brief-2020-ENG (PDF)
Executive Summary Pakistan-Transgender-Summary-Advocacy-Analysis-brief-2020-ENG-URD (in English and Urdu, PDF)
Nov 21, 2019 | News
The Upper House of Parliament must revise the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, which was passed by the Lower House of Parliament on 5 August 2019.
The Bill does not adequately protect the rights of transgender people, and fails to comply with India’s constitutional and international human rights obligations, the ICJ said today.
The Government introduced the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, before the Parliament on 19 July 2019. It was passed by the Lok Sabha (the Lower House of Parliament) on 5 August, 2019, despite a lack of consultation with the transgender community and serious weaknesses in the Bill, which would be in violation of the Supreme Court’s NALSA judgment.
“If the Upper House of Parliament adopts the Bill in its current form, without any amendments, it will miss an important opportunity to introduce a law that respects, protects and fulfills the human rights of transgender people as required by the Supreme Court’s decision in NALSA v. UOI and India’s international obligations,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Director.
The current draft, fails to address key concerns that have been repeatedly raised by the transgender community and human rights organizations.
Critically, the Bill appears to continue to mandate sex reassignment surgery for transgender people. This requirement would contravene the Supreme Court’s judgment in NALSA v. UOI, which guarantees the right to self-identification without the need for medical intervention. Further, the Bill does not make provision for affirmative action in employment or education despite the Supreme Court’s mandate in NALSA v. UOI.
Moreover, the Bill sets out lighter sentences for several criminal offences, such as “sexual abuse” and “physical abuse”, when they are committed against transgender people. In addition, the Bill does not adequately define these offences and retains provisions that could be used in a discriminatory manner to target transgender people for criminal prosecution. It also fails to address the lack of an effective mechanism to enforce the legal prohibition against discrimination on the ground of gender identity.
The ICJ has recommended the deletion of provisions that mandate sex reassignment surgery and that set out lighter sentences for criminal offences against transgender people. In addition, the ICJ recommends the inclusion of provisions addressing affirmative action for transgender persons in education and employment.
“We urge the Upper House of Parliament to address these deficiencies before passing the Bill into law, in accordance with India’s constitutional and international law obligations, and to ensure meaningful consultation with the transgender community” Rawski said.
Contact
Maitreyi Gupta (Delhi), ICJ International Legal Adviser for India, e: maitreyi.gupta(a)icj.org, t: +91 7756028369
Read also
ICJ 2019 Report on India Living with Dignity: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity-Based Human Rights Violations in Housing, Work, and Public Spaces in India. The Report details human rights violations suffered by LGBTQ persons in their family homes, workplaces, and public spaces including streets, public toilets, public transport and shopping centres.
ICJ Briefing Paper on India: Legal and Jurisprudential Developments on Transgender Rights, SAATHII Vistaara Coalition. The paper analyses in detail the domestic judicial developments on transgender rights as well as the legislative process undertaken until the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2018 was passed on 17 December 2018.
ICJ Briefing Paper on The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2016, analyzes the 2016 Bill, its shortcomings, and India’s international obligations, as it is the basis of the 2018 Bill.
ICJ Briefing Paper on Implementation of NALSA Judgment discusses the 2014 April NALSA decision that affirmed that transgender people have the right to decide their self-identified gender. The paper analyses the responsibilities placed on Indian authorities, gaps in implementation, and India’s relevant international law obligations.
Nov 8, 2019 | Advocacy
Myanmar’s criminal laws are outdated and fail to respect and protect human rights, especially the rights of LGBTQ people and rights enshrined in binding international human rights treaties. This is the key finding of the new report ‘In the Shadows: Systemic Injustice Based on Sexual Orientation and Identity/Expression in Myanmar’.
The Denmark-Myanmar Programme on Rule of Law and Human Rights, implemented by the ICJ in partnership with Danish Institute for Human Rights commissioned this report. The report team was made up of ICJ staff who are part of the Denmark Myanmar Programme. Legal review was also provided by advisers from the ICJ team. The report is endorsed by three leading local LGBTQ and human rights organizations and one network : LGBT Rights Network, Colors Rainbow, Kings N Queens, and Equality Myanmar.
The report highlights emblematic cases and recurring human rights violations against LGBTQ people in Myanmar. Research for the report included interviews with 70 respondents from across several states to ascertain their experiences and impressions of the criminal justice system. All testimonies are anonymous and all identities are pseudonyms.
The report highlights the outdated laws that continue to affect the lives of LGBTQ people, including Section 377 of the Penal Code which criminalizes consensual same-sex conduct. Even though not commonly enforced, the fact that this law remains in place since the colonial era legitimizes prejudice, discrimination and extortion against LGBTQ people. India’s Supreme Court decided only last year that criminalization of consensual same-sex relationships under Section 377 is a violation of the Indian Constitution and is in breach of India’s obligation under international law. That is the reason why Myanmar should follow this trend and repeal Section 377 as soon as possible or at least insofar it criminalizes same-sex relationships.
Other criminal provisions that play a large part in justifying abuse against LGBTQ people are the “Shadow Laws” or “Darkness Laws” – the colloquial name of colonial era legislation that can restrict citizens’ ability to be in public after dark without an accepted justification. These provisions – from which the report’s title is drawn – are primary examples of criminal laws that are misused against LGBTQ people and result in ongoing stigmatization, human rights violations and overall injustice. Some of their provisions are vague and overbroad and are therefore open to serious abuse. Law enforcement officials too easily invoke these provisions to harass, threaten, detain and even bring spurious charges against LGBTQ people. Research from the report documents how these criminal laws have been used to enter LGBTQ people’s homes, accuse them of ‘committing unnatural sex’, take them into police custody, and to subject them to abuse.
This report further details the discriminatory attitudes of law enforcement officers, which contribute to LGBTQ people being targeted and subjected to unjust and unfair treatment within the criminal justice system. The mistreatment takes many forms, from arbitrary accusations and ensuing detentions, physical, sexual and verbal assaults, and coerced concealment of sexual orientation and gender identity/expression. Given the biased, discriminatory and at times violent behavior towards them, LGBTQ people have come to mistrust law enforcement agencies and avoid the justice system wherever possible.
‘In the Shadows’ identifies the problematic attitudes of certain key players in Myanmar’s criminal justice system with respect to Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity/Expression issues. Core concerns include the discriminatory treatment and the barriers to justice LGBTQ people face, from their role in public life, or as a detainee, witness or suspect in court.
The report concludes with a set of recommendations that seek to make existing law and policy more protective of LGBTQ peoples’ rights. This includes the repeal of Section 377 of the Penal Code, at least insofar as it criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual conduct, the reform of the ‘Shadow Laws’, and cessation of all discriminatory arrests and detentions.
Human rights and LGBTQ rights activist and contributor to the report, U Aung Myo Min, sums up the importance of ‘In the Shadows’: “The stories in this report highlight the suffering, intimidation, and threats faced by LGBTIQ in Myanmar today. These injustices must be stopped, and we all have a moral imperative to be part of the solution.”
We are committed to working with main stakeholders in the country, such as the Parliament, the Police, GAD, actors of the legal system and the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission. We are willing and prepared to provide full support, expertise and advice to the Myanmar Parliament in pursuit of the repeal of Section 377 of the Penal Code, the provision for ‘unnatural at least insofar as it criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual conduct, to enact anti-discrimination legislation in Myanmar, to become a party to nine core international human rights treaties, to establish legal gender recognition for transgender persons, to reform vague and discriminatory laws.
This statement is endorsed by: LGBT Rights Network, Colors Rainbow, Kings N Queens and Equality Myanmar.
Report
Download In the Shadows: Systemic Injustice Based on Sexual Orientation and Identity/Expression in Myanmar in English.
Oct 15, 2019
Today the ICJ, together with ILGA-Europe, the AIRE Centre and Human Rights Watch, submitted a joint third-party intervention to the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Oganezova v. Armenia (Application nos. 71367/12 and 72961/12).
In their written submissions to the Court, the interveners addressed the following issues:
(a)
under European and international human rights jurisprudence, the victim’s identity as an lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) person is relevant to the assessment of whether the threshold for torture and other ill-treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) has been met. Specifically, the discrimination directed towards LGBT persons may indicate a particular motive and intent that may meet the threshold of Article 3 ECHR;
(b)
the Contracting States have a positive obligation to protect persons in their jurisdiction from violence and harassment based on their real or imputed sexual orientation and/or gender identity or expression, including the obligation to prevent, investigate, prosecute, punish and remedy such acts. In particular, Contracting States have the additional procedural obligation to take all reasonable steps to establish whether any hatred or prejudice connected to a protected characteristic may have played a role in the violent attack, where acts of violence are motivated in whole or in part by prejudice against an individual’s real or imputed sexual orientation and/or gender identity or expression; and
(c)
That the attitudes and practices in responding to violence and harassment against LGBT people in Armenia provide important contextual information in analyzing the case.”
Europe-Oganezova v. Armenia-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2019-ENG (full text of submission, in PDF)
