Nov 7, 2013 | News
FIDH, ILGA-Europe, ICJ, AIRE-Centre and HLHR welcome this important decision. The organizations had submitted written comments about the case to the Court in June 2011.
In a judgment in the joint cases of Vallianatos and Mylonas v. Greece and C.S. and others v. Greece delivered today, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Greece had violated the European Convention on Human Rights by excluding same-sex couples from a “civil union”, restricted in Greece to heterosexual couples.
“All Member States of the Council of Europe must condemn any form of discrimination against homosexuals. Homosexual couples, as heterosexual couples, involved in a stable relationship, should benefit from a legal recognition”, said Karim Lahidji, FIDH President. He added: “Twenty-two of the Member States of the Council of Europe have created a legal form of recognition for same-sex couples. Greece must change its law to comply with the European Convention on Human Rights”.
Evelyne Paradis, Executive Director of ILGA-Europe, said: “The European Court of Human Rights reaffirmed already established principle that sexual orientation discrimination is in breach of the European Convention. Now the Court took yet another step to say that if a country provides legal recognition to unmarried heterosexual couples in a form of civil unions, same-sex couples also must be able to benefit from such legal recognition. European consensus on the legal recognition of same-sex partnership is constantly growing and we welcome the fact the Court is taking it into account and reflect in its jurisprudence.”
Livio Zilli, Senior Legal Adviser at the International Commission of Jurists, said: “The Court reiterated that the Convention was a living instrument to be interpreted in the present-day conditions and that the state was obliged under the Convention to take account of societal developments, as well as the fact that there is no single way or choice when it came to people’s exercise and enjoyment of their right to family or private life.”
In its decision, the Court ruled that Greece had failed to provide a convincing justification for excluding same-sex couples.
The Government’s argument, according to which the law’s main purpose was to protect children of unmarried parents, did not constitute a valid reason, because the law’s real objective was the legal recognition of a new form of family life.
Therefore, exclusion of same-sex couples breaches the Convention.
In November 2008, Greece adopted a law creating the “civil unions”, an alternative to marriage.
However, the first article restricts such unions to “two physical individuals of different sex who have reached the age of majority”. An animated debate relating to the inclusion of same-sex couples took place before the adoption of this law.
During the debate before the Hellenic Parliament, the Minister of Justice at the time, declared: “We mustn’t include same sex couples. We are indeed convinced that the needs and demands of the Hellenic society do not cross this line; as a legislator, the political party in power is accountable to the Greek people; we have our own beliefs and negotiations are over; I believe it is the way to go”.
In their written comments, FIDH, ILGA-Europe, ICJ and AIRE-Centre recalled that the European Court has repeatedly condemned direct discrimination based on sexual orientation as a violation of protected rights.
The Court’s case-law reiterates that when it comes to a difference in treatment based on sex or sexual orientation, the principle of proportionality does not merely require that the measure chosen is in principle suited for realising the aim sought.
It must also be shown that the discriminatory treatment is necessary in order to achieve that aim, otherwise the measure will be in violation of the Convention. Creating a “civil union” only for unmarried different-sex couples amounts to direct discrimination and therefore violates the Convention.
Today’s decision follows recent jurisprudence of the Court against discrimination of same-sex couples. On February 2013, in the X. and others v. Austria case, the European Court condemned Austria for banning a homosexual person to adopt the biological child of his/her partner. It decided that the ban of unmarried same-sex couples, which are in the same situation than unmarried different-sex couples, was not justified and violated article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with article 8.
Contact:
Livio Zilli, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ, e-mail: livio.zilli(a)icj.org
Additional information:
- Judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Vallianatos and Mylonas v. Greece and C.S. and others v. Greece
- According to the Rainbow Europe’s Index (May 2013), Greece came 25th among 49 European countries in terms of laws and policies affecting the human rights of LGBTI people.
Greece-Vallianatos_CEDH-news-press release-2013-FR (full French text in pdf)
Nov 7, 2013 | Публикации
Множество женщин в Казахстане сталкиваются с рядом серьезных правовых и процессуальных проблем и препятствий в попытках добиться справедливости после случаев дискриминации и гендернообусловленного насилия, говорится в новом докладе МКЮ.
Опубликованный сегодня доклад «Доступ женщин к правосудию в Казахстане: определение препятствий и потребности в переменах» оценивает некоторые из существующих проблем и недостаточной правовой защиты [и доступа к средствам правовой защиты при нарушениях] в ситуациях дискриминации, а также сексуального и бытового насилия .
Он подчеркивает, что существенные недостатки и пробелы материального и процессуального права в Казахстане, касающихся дискриминации и насилия в отношении женщин, подрывают возможность женщин добиться правовой защиты .
«Содействие гендерному равенству и предотвращение насилия и дискриминации в отношении женщин требуют постоянного участия и долгосрочных обязательств. В этом процессе необходимы длительные усилия. Казахстан должен принять серьезные меры по решению вопросов, указанных в настоящем докладе, с тем, чтобы обеспечить соответствие его законов и процедур потребностям женщин и защите их прав на практике», – заявила Лея Хоктор, юрист Программы МКЮ по правам женщин.
В докладе подробно описывается, каким образом международное право прав человека обязывает Казахстан принять эффективные и значимые шаги для обеспечения того, чтобы его законодательство адекватно регулировало вопросы дискриминации и насилия в отношении женщин.
«Настоящий доклад предоставляет государственным структурам, представителям гражданского общества и адвокатам важные ориентиры в отношении содержания международных обязательств Казахстана по продвижению доступа женщин к правосудию», – сказал Тимур Шакиров, юрист Европейской программы МКЮ.
Контакты:
Лиа Хоктор: leah.hoctor(a)icj.org
Тимур Шакиров: temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Kazakhstan-Women’s Access to Justice-press release-2013-RUS (полный текст)
Kazakhstan-Women’s Access to Justice-Publications-Report-2013-RUS (доклад)
Nov 7, 2013
Many women in Kazakhstan face a range of serious legal and procedural challenges and obstacles when seeking justice for discrimination and gender-based violence, a new ICJ report says.
Launched today, the report Women’s Access to Justice in Kazakhstan: Identifying the Obstacles and Need for Change assesses some of these challenges and the deficits of legal protection, and access to remedy for violations, in situations of discrimination and sexual and domestic violence.
The report also underlines that significant flaws and gaps in Kazakhstan’s legal and procedural framework dealing with discrimination and violence against women undermine the ability of women to seek legal redress.
“Advancing gender equality and preventing violence and discrimination against women requires sustained engagement and long-term commitment, it is not a static process,” said Leah Hoctor, Senior Legal Adviser for ICJ’s Women’s Human Rights Programme. “Kazakhstan should take serious measures to address the issues identified in this report so as to ensure its laws and procedures address women’s needs and protect their rights in practice.”
The report details the way in which international human rights law obliges Kazakhstan to take effective and meaningful steps to ensure its legal framework adequately deals with discrimination and violence against women.
“This report provides both government actors, civil society representatives and the legal profession with important guidance as to the content of Kazakhstan’s international obligations to advance women’s access to justice,” said Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser for ICJ’s Europe Programme.
Contacts:
Leah Hoctor: leah.hoctor(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov: temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Kazakhstan-Women’s Access to Justice-Publications-Report-2013 (full text in pdf)
Kazakhstan-Women’s Access to Justice-press release-2013-RUS (full text in pdf)
Kazakhstan-Women’s Access to Justice-Publications-Report-2013-RUS (full text in pdf)
Nov 5, 2013 | Новости, Статьи
Международная комиссия юристов (МКЮ) сегодня приветствовала освобождение 1-го ноября адвоката Зинаиды Мухторовой из психиатрической лечебницы в Астане, Казахстан.
Адвокат принудительно содержалась в психиатрическом учреждении «Медицинский центр проблем психиатрического здоровья» в течение неполных трех месяцев.
Не смотря на освобождение, сообщается, что в данный момент отсутствуют результаты психиатрической экспертизы.
«В то время как освобождение адвоката можно только приветствовать, МКЮ по-прежнему обеспокоена тем, что задержание Зинаиды Мухторовой представляло собой ответную меру на законное осуществления ею своих профессиональных обязанностей адвоката в нарушение ее права на свободу, а также Основных принципов ООН, касающихся роли юристов», – сказала Роушин Пиллей , директор программы МКЮ по Европе.
«В данный момент необходимо обеспечить, чтобы Зинаида Мухторова могла оспорить законность ее лишения свободы на основе справедливой процедуры, и получить соответствующие возмещение за любое нарушение ее прав человека», – добавила она.
Зинаида Мухторова была помещена в психиатрическую лечебницу 9 августа после того как ее силой увезли из своего дома несколько сотрудников полиции и медицинского персонала.
Среди причин для ее содержания в психиатрической лечебнице были ее «возможное возникновение кверулянтской» деятельности и «сутяжничество».
МКЮ ранее выражала обеспокоенность тем, что ее содержание психиатрическом учреждении строилось на основаниях, состоящих в осуществлении законной профессиональной деятельности в качестве адвоката.
МКЮ продолжает следить за этим делом, в том числе за текущими обжалованиями в судах Казахстана законности содержания Зинаиды Мухторовой в психиатрических учреждениях в данном и предыдущем случаях.
В этой связи МКЮ призывает правительство обеспечить справедливость судебных процедур, обжалующих ее содержание под стражей.
Контакты:
Роушин Пиллей, директор Региональной программы МКЮ по Европе, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Тимур Шакиров, правовой советник Региональной программы МКЮ по Европе, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Kazakhstan-Mukhtorova statement-news-webstory-2013-Rus (полный текст, PDF)
Nov 5, 2013 | News
The ICJ welcomes the release on 1 November of lawyer Zinaida Mukhotorova, from a psychiatric facility in Astana, Kazakhstan.
The lawyer was forcibly detained in the psychiatric facility, the “Medical Centre of the Problems of Psychiatric Health”, for almost three months.
Despite her release, the results of the psychiatric examination were said to be pending.
“While this release is welcome, the ICJ remains concerned that Zinaida Mukhotorova’s detention represented a reprisal for her legitimate exercise of her professional duties as a lawyer, in violation of her right to liberty as well as the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Regional Programme. “It must now be ensured that Zinaida Mukhotorova can challenge the legality of her detention through fair procedures, and receive appropriate measures of reparation for any violation of her human rights” she added.
Zinaida Mukhtorova was placed in the psychiatric facility on 9 August after she was forcibly taken from her house by several police officers and medical personnel.
Among the reasons given for her detention were her “possibly querulous” and “litigious” activity.
The ICJ previously raised concern that her psychiatric detention was being justified on grounds consisting in the exercise of her legitimate professional functions as a lawyer.
The ICJ continues to monitor the case, including ongoing legal challenges in the Kazakhstan courts to the lawfulness of Zinaida Mukhtorova’s detention in psychiatric facilities on this and another previous occasion.
In this regard, the ICJ calls on the government to ensure fairness of the proceedings challenging her detention.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Kazakhstan-Mukhtorova statement-news-webstory-2013-Rus (full text in pdf)
