Study to investigate discrimination against gay and lesbian soldiers in Swiss army
Study to investigate discrimination against gay and lesbian soldiers in Swiss army
Leave a reply
Author Archives: Andreas R. Ziegler
Turkey’s top court rules in favor of LGBT activist in landmark hate speech case
Turkey’s top court rules in favor of LGBT activist in landmark hate speech case
Turkey’s Constitutional Court has ruled in favor of a LGBT activist, declaring that a lower court’s refusal to block homophobic content targeting her was a violation of her rights, the Stockholm Center for Freedom reported.
Efruz Kaya, a civil society employee represented by the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA), had requested an access ban on homophobic news reports published after she appeared in a video for “Trans Day of Remembrance” week in November 2019. Her requests were denied by a penal court of peace, prompting her to appeal to the top court.
The decision is the first of its kind from the Constitutional Court regarding the failure to prevent hate speech against LGBT individuals.
The ruling acknowledges that the rejection of Kaya’s request for an access ban infringed on her rights protected under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which ensures respect for private and family life.
The court also concluded that her right to an effective remedy was violated, meaning she was not provided with an adequate legal resolution or recourse to address the harm she suffered.
In November 2019 Kaya participated in a “Trans Day of Remembrance” video. On November 21 and 22 the Yeni Akit, Doğru Haber and İlke news outlets published articles targeting Kaya’s sexual identity. Her request for the removal of these articles was rejected, and subsequent appeals by MLSA lawyers were also dismissed.
The top court approved Kaya’s request to block access to news reports containing derogatory terms such as “LGBT pervert” and “homosexual deviant.” Additionally, the court awarded Kaya TL 10,000 ($310) in non-pecuniary damages.
Homosexuality is not illegal in Turkey, but homophobia is widespread. While there are no official figures, Turkey has slid down the LGBT rights index published by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA). Last year, it was ranked 47th out of the 49 countries ILGA lists in its Eurasia region.
The increase in hateful rhetoric against LGBT communities in Turkey coincided with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s electoral alliances in recent years with ultranationalist and ultraconservative political factions.
Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas fails in challenge to rules that bar her from elite women’s races
Thomas had asked sports court in Switzerland to overturn rules approved in 2022
Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas failed in her challenge against rules that stop her from competing in elite women’s races because judges ruled she did not have standing to bring the case.
US federal judge rules Florida ban on gender-affirming care unconstitutional
US federal judge rules Florida ban on gender-affirming care unconstitutional
A federal judge ruled Tuesday that a Florida ban on certain gender-affirming care including puberty blockers and hormone therapy was illegal under the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution.
Florida Statute Section 456.52 banned individuals under the age of 18 from receiving puberty blockers to “stop or delay puberty in order to affirm a person’s perception of his or her sex if that perception is inconsistent with the person’s [natal] sex.” It also banned hormone therapy “to affirm a person’s perception of his or her sex” for the same reasons.
The law grandfathered in minors who were already receiving gender-affirming drugs but created new restrictions for adults who wished to begin the therapies, restricting the therapy to in-person treatment by licensed physicians. Bans on gender-affirming surgeries for minors and further restrictions for these kinds of surgeries for adults were not included in the plaintiffs’ challenge.
In his decision Robert Hinkle, a US Federal Judge for the Northern District of Florida, wrote:
The elephant in the room should be noted at the outset. Gender identity is real. The record makes it clear. The defendants, speaking through their attorneys, have admitted it. At least one defense expert has admitted it…the only defense expert who has actually treated a significant number of transgender patients.
Hinkle continued that many individuals believe that gender identity is “chosen” like “one might choose whether to read Shakespeare or Grisham.” He added that many people oppose all things related to transgender identity and are often fueled by religious beliefs, comparing people’s denial of transgender identity to the same kind of “intensity” or “animus that has attended racism and misogyny…”. He stated that:
Transgender opponents are of course free to hold their beliefs. But they are not are free to discriminate against transgender individuals just for being transgender. In time, discrimination against transgender individuals will diminish, just as racism and misogyny have diminished. To paraphrase a civil-rights advocate from an earlier time, the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. In the meantime, the federal courts have a role to play in upholding the Constitution and its laws.
Hinkle cited high depression and suicide rates among the transgender community and pointed out that medical intervention via treatment was only available to “adolescents or adults, never younger children.” Stressing that the ban on surgery for minors was not an issue in the case and explaining that there was no evidence in the record that such surgeries had even taken place in Florida.
The court applied intermediate scrutiny holding that the law was based on classifications of sex and gender nonconformity also finding that animus in the law against transgender individuals as another basis for heightened scrutiny.
Hinkle rejected the defense’s claim that the law was an example of the constitutional exercise of legislative power to regulate the medical industry citing animus in the legislative record. The judge pointed toward legislators who had used hyperbolic language against transgender individuals. Specifically quoting one Florida House member who referred to transgender witnesses present at the committee as “mutants” and “demons.”
Finally, the court held that the outright ban was not sufficiently related to the state’s legitimate interest in safeguarding health since the care could be appropriately regulated and a ban would cause “needless suffering” from those experiencing gender dysphoria.
Florida’s conservative led government has been aggressive in legislating against various issues relating to transgender rights including so called “don’t say gay” laws regulating the use of personal pronouns among other pronouncements from Governor Ron DeSantis to battle “woke” culture in the state.
The post US federal judge rules Florida ban on gender-affirming care unconstitutional appeared first on JURIST – News.
US appeals court upholds public school ban of student wearing transgender-critical shirt
US appeals court upholds public school ban of student wearing transgender-critical shirt
The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on Sunday upheld a Massachusetts public middle school’s prohibition against one of its students from wearing a shirt with a message critical of transgender ideology. The appeals court found the prohibition to be consistent with the free speech protections of the US Constitution’s First Amendment under Tinker v. Des Moines.
John T. Nichols Middle School (NMS) has a dress code with a preface stating, “clothing … that causes distractions and inhibits learning is not allowed.” The dress code forbids “hate speech” and “imagery that target[s] groups based on … gender identity.” It also forbids “apparel that the administration determines to be unacceptable to our community standards.”
On March 21, 2023, Seventh grader Liam Morrison wore a shirt with the message “[t]here are only two genders” to NMS. The school contacted Morrison’s father and requested him to make Morrison wear more appropriate attire. Morrison’s father refused to comply and Morrison was told he could not attend class unless he stopped wearing the shirt. Morrison attempted to wear the shirt again with the message “censored” taped over the “only two” from the original message, but the school demanded him to remove it and he complied. Morrison through his father sued NMS for the shirt bans and alleged that the dress code is too vague and overbroad, violating the right to free speech protected under the First Amendment.
NMS argued at trial that the shirt ban was consistent with both of Tinker‘s restrictions and that Morrison’s dress code claims lacked standing. Tinker is a case that provided First Amendment protection for public school students to wear black armbands at school to protest US involvement in the Vietnam War. The case provided that constitutional restrictions on students’ speech in public schools are speech that “materially disrupts classwork [and] speech that involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others.”
NMS also contended that Morrison’s shirt violates the rights of LGBT+ students “to feel safe in school and to be free from harassment and bullying while in school” and that the strong self-advocacy of LGBT+ students would materially disrupt classwork. The trial court’s decision supported NMS on the basis that the “rights of others” restriction applied to Morrison and that Morrison’s dress code claims would not likely succeed on the merits. The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s decision, but most notably added their support for the “materially disrupts classwork” restriction and Morrison’s dress code claims lacking standing when applied to the “community standards” rule.
In addition, the appeals court concluded that the appropriate decision-makers in deciding what would make “an environment conducive to learning” at NMS are the educators and not federal judges. Accordingly, the educators are better equipped to decide whether to enforce the dress code as they are the closest to the scene.
The post US appeals court upholds public school ban of student wearing transgender-critical shirt appeared first on JURIST – News.
UN rights office denounces ‘horrendous’ attack on Tanzania transgender activist
UN rights office denounces ‘horrendous’ attack on Tanzania transgender activist
The United Nations Human Rights Office condemned an attack against transgender woman and activist Mauzinde in Tanzania on Friday, calling it “horrendous.”
Mauzinde, a resident of Rahaleo, was found abandoned in the forest, beaten and with her ears cut. The UN Human Rights office said that she had been “tortured & sexually assaulted by 12 men” and called for “bold action to combat discrimination against #LGBTIQ+ people and other minorities.”
The attack could be a violation of Mauzinde’s rights under international and Tanzanian law. Article 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights mandates that “each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind,” such as sex or other status. Furthermore, Principle 2 of the Yogyakarta Principles stipulates that everyone is entitled to enjoy all human rights without discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Principle 5 also emphasizes that everyone “has the right to security of the person and to protection by the State against violence or bodily harm, whether inflicted by government officials or by any individual or group.”
Additionally, according to Article 13 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, “all persons are equal before the law and are entitled, without any discrimination, to protection and equality before the law.”
The post UN rights office denounces ‘horrendous’ attack on Tanzania transgender activist appeared first on JURIST – News.
Germany includes “sexual orientation” in as an inadmissible reason for the persecution of an identifiable group in the definition of persecution as a crime against humanity
Germany includes “sexual orientation” in as an inadmissible reason for the persecution of an identifiable group in the definition of persecution as a crime against humanity
International Criminal Law
More: https://schwulissimo.de/neuigkeiten/staerkung-des-voelkerrechts-mehr-schutz-fuer-homosexuelle
LGA-Europe, TGEU, OII Europe, IGLYO and EL*C jointly welcome the inclusion of SOGIGESC grounds in new EU Directive on minimum standards for equality bodies
LGA-Europe, TGEU, OII Europe, IGLYO and EL*C jointly welcome the inclusion of SOGIGESC grounds in new EU Directive on minimum standards for equality bodies
On 7 May 2024, two new directives on minimum standards for equality bodies were officially adopted by the EU. One of the directives includes in its recitals and articles the grounds of gender expression, gender identity and sex characteristics in addition to sexual orientation. This marks the first time sex characteristics have been mentioned explicitly in an EU directive, and the second time gender identity and gender expression have been mentioned in an EU directive1. This is an important milestone for the protection of LGBTI people in EU legislation, and follows two years of joint advocacy on these directives by OII Europe, TGEU, ILGA-Europe, EL*C and IGLYO.
More: https://www.oiieurope.org/joint-statement-milestone-for-trans-and-intersex-rights-in-europe/
Amnesty International: FIFA must protect human rights by securing binding safeguards from 2030 and 2034 World Cup bidders – new report
Amnesty International: FIFA must protect human rights by securing binding safeguards from 2030 and 2034 World Cup bidders – new report
The report, Playing a Dangerous Game? Human Rights Risks Linked to the 2030 and 2034 FIFA World Cups, assesses the human rights risks related to the bids – a joint offer from Morocco, Spain and Portugal with additional games to be played in Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay for the 2030 World Cup finals – and another from Saudi Arabia to host the 2034 tournament. Detailed bid offers, including human rights strategies, are expected to be submitted to FIFA for evaluation within weeks, with football’s governing body due to confirm the hosts in December.
Despite the Saudi Tourist Board’s assurance that ‘everyone is welcome,’ there is no legal protection for LGBTI people. Prosecutions are often made under the country’s vague and overly broad public order and morality regulations, as well as the Anti-Cyber Crime Law.
Australia: New South Wales premier apologizes for laws criminalizing homosexuality
Australia: New South Wales premier apologizes for laws criminalizing homosexuality
New South Wales Premier Chris Minns formally apologized in Parliament House on Thursday to all those convicted or affected by laws that criminalized homosexuality, which was decriminalized 40 years ago.
New South Wales is the last Australian state to apologize for these laws. Victoria and South Australia apologized in 2016, followed by the other three states in 2017. Same-sex marriage was legalized in Australia in 2017. Homosexual acts between adult men were criminalized in the 1980s, with fear and hostility present amid the AIDS epidemic. Although sex between women was never a criminal offense, the fear was equally as present.
Premier Minns apologized on behalf of the New South Wales government and parliament for the harm caused by these unjust laws, acknowledging the lives damaged, diminished, or destroyed by them. He stated, “to those who survived these terrible years and to those who never made it through, we are truly sorry.”
Minns shared the story of Peter Bonsall-Boone, known as “Bonne,” who made history in 1972 by becoming the first man in Australia to share a same-sex kiss on national television. Bonne was arrested by the state and his conviction lead to his expulsion from the Anglican Seminary where he was studying to be a priest. The repercussions of Bonne’s conviction followed him throughout life until his death. He was unable to work as a public servant, serve on a jury or be a Justice of the Peace. He had difficulty in securing a home loan with his partner, was denied work as a taxi driver and faced scrutiny when he volunteered to teach English to immigrants. His partner, Peter de Waal, campaigned for the state to issue a formal apology for decades.
New South Wales Premier Minns noted that Bonne passed away 7 years ago but before his death was notified of the expungement of these historical convictions.
Bonne passed away 7 years ago, but even at the end of his life, fifty years after the arrest it still weighed on him. In 2014, when this parliament passed a law allowing for the expungement of these historical convictions it meant a great deal for people like Bonne. Just weeks, before he died, Bonne received that official letter notifying him that his criminal record had been extinguished. Peter read those words out to him and said it was the final time he had ever smiled.
Independent Sydney Member of Parliament, Alex Greenwich, is the only openly gay member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly. He is advocating for the government to follow this apology with action. Greenwich has proposed an “equality bill” which will prohibit religious schools from firing LGBTQ+ teachers and prevent students from being expelled for coming out as gay. The bill, which has passed the committee review stage, would also allow transgender people to register a change of sex without undergoing a gender affirmation procedure.
The post New South Wales premier apologizes for laws criminalizing homosexuality appeared first on JURIST – News.
International and Comparative SOGIESC Law - Professor Andreas R Ziegler 