Nearly half of Russian LGBTQ people faced violence or threats in 2024, new report finds
More: https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/05/19/we-automatically-look-over-our-shoulders
45 UN experts renew call for gender centered approach to reach human rights goals
45 UN human rights experts reaffirmed on Thursday that gender must remain central to the fight for equality and human rights worldwide.
The statement was signed by UN special procedure mandate holders from various countries, jointly emphasizing that “binary conceptions of sex” result in an incomplete picture of the “social and cultural factors that shape identity and lived experience.” Thus, the experts urge that “[g]ender-based discrimination must be addressed alongside sex-based discrimination.”
According to the experts, employing a gender-based perspective advances human rights and equality goals due to a more comprehensive appreciation of how “roles, expectations, and hierarchies manifest in education, health, culture, at the workplace or with respect to social, economic, and political opportunities.” As such, the experts call on states and other stakeholders to reaffirm their commitment to gender equality and integration of a gender-based practice in international law. This call is consistent with the goals and objectives outlined in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 5 on gender equality.
The value of recognizing intersectional forms of discrimination, including those based on sexual orientation and gender identity, was also supported by the work of the Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI). The current Independent Expert mandate is held by South African scholar Graeme Reid and was recently renewed by the UN Human Rights Council.
The UN experts’ statement comes amidst issues of gender-based discrimination across borders. In mid-July, the UN highlighted persistent gender gaps in sports, calling on member states to address gender inequalities. More specifically, in the US, several states, including Tennessee and Oklahoma, have made efforts to ban gender-affirming care for minors. Meanwhile, the UN also recently condemned the Taliban’s “gender apartheid” in Afghanistan, urging that dismantling these barriers is key to reaching gender equality.
The post 45 UN experts renew call for gender centered approach to reach human rights goals appeared first on JURIST – News.
USA announce that it will not participate in the United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review (UPR) scheduled for November 7
| This week, Laurel Sprague, Research Director and Blachford/Cooper Distinguished Scholar at the Williams Institute, was one of six U.S. participants in the pre-sessions for the United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the United States. The UPR requires UN member states to report approximately every four and a half years on their human rights progress and receive recommendations from other states for continued improvement. In her testimony, Laurel addressed the U.S. government’s failures to meet its human rights obligations toward LGBTQ people since the last review in 2020 and offered recommendations for the reviewing states. On Wednesday, the U.S. announced that it would not participate in the UPR scheduled for November 7. “The State Department’s decision not to participate in this review marks a reversal of U.S. leadership on LGBTQ rights and sets a dangerous precedent,” Laurel said from Geneva. “This decision tells governments that they can disregard human rights recommendations, which threatens to further undermine human rights globally. It puts minority groups—including sexual and gender minorities—at greater risk and removes a key accountability process for anyone needing to defend themselves against government overreach.” |
USA: Scholars file amicus brief with the Supreme Court in conversion therapy case
| Scholars file amicus brief with the Supreme Court in conversion therapy case On August 27, Williams Institute scholars, represented by Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the Supreme Court in Chiles v. Salazar. The case was brought by Kaley Chiles, a mental health professional in Colorado, who is challenging the state’s ban on conversion therapy for youth. Chiles contends that the law restricts her ability to provide comprehensive counseling consistent with her and her clients’ religious beliefs, in violation of the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause. The brief presents research showing that conversion therapy is ineffective and can cause serious harm to vulnerable LGBTQ youth, such as increased risks of suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, physical health problems, financial hardships, and social isolation. The brief also supports Colorado’s authority to regulate the medical profession to prevent such harms. Read the brief |
| IMPACT |
Activists condemn public flogging of two men under Indonesia’s Islamic criminal law
Amnesty International on Tuesday condemned the public caning of two men in Indonesia’s Aceh province after they were convicted of same-sex relations under Islamic criminal law.
Aceh, located on the northern tip of Sumatra island, is Indonesia’s only province that criminalizes consensual same-sex acts. Under its special autonomy status, Aceh enforces qanun jinayat, Islamic criminal bylaws introduced in 2015 that criminalize adultery, gambling, alcohol consumption, and same-sex relations, with punishments including up to 200 lashes.
Aceh, located on the northern tip of Sumatra island, is Indonesia’s only province with special autonomy to enforce qanun jinayat, a set of bylaws introduced in 2015 that criminalize acts such as adultery, gambling, alcohol consumption, and same-sex relations, prescribing punishments including lashes.
The men, aged 20 and 21, were publicly flogged 76 times each after the local Sharia court found them guilty of engaging in consensual same-sex activity. Spectators reportedly watched on, with some recording the abuse as it was carried out in Banda Aceh.
Montse Ferrer, Amnesty International Regional Research Director, criticized the flogging, stating:
This public flogging of two young men under Aceh’s Islamic Criminal Code for consensual sex is a disturbing act of state-sanctioned discrimination and cruelty. This punishment is a horrifying reminder of the institutionalized stigma and abuse faced by LGBTQ+ individuals in Aceh.
Amnesty has repeatedly urged Indonesia to repeal these laws, arguing they contravene the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the UN Convention Against Torture, both of which Indonesia has ratified. The UN Human Rights Committee has previously called on the government to prohibit corporal punishment and protect LGBTQ+ persons from discrimination.
Despite international criticism, Aceh authorities maintain that the qanun jinayat reflects local customs and Islamic values. The central government in Jakarta has historically deferred to Aceh’s autonomy arrangements, though rights groups argue this undermines Indonesia’s constitutional commitment to equality and non-discrimination. Tuesday’s flogging underscores ongoing tensions between Indonesia’s decentralized legal system and its international human rights commitments.
Amnesty has called on the government to immediately halt the practice of public caning and decriminalize consensual same-sex relations nationwide.
Such incidents are not novel in Aceh. The province has carried out public canings for same-sex relations and other morality offenses since implementing the Islamic criminal laws in 2015. Human rights organizations have repeatedly condemned the practice.
The post Activists condemn public flogging of two men under Indonesia’s Islamic criminal law appeared first on JURIST – News.
To be queer in parts of Colombia is ‘to sign your own death sentence’
Colombia’s gang members tell CNN of a killing campaign aimed at LGBTQ people. Trans women, like Sara Millerey and Nawar Jimenez, are paying the price. This story is part of As Equals, CNN’s ongoing series on gender inequality. For information about how the series is funded and more, check out our FAQs.
USA: Federal appeals court reverses ban on drag shows at Texas A&M university
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Monday reversed a lower court’s decision to uphold a ban on drag shows at West Texas A&M University. The appeals court stated that the plaintiffs had shown sufficient evidence that there would be harm to their First Amendment rights as a result of the ban, meeting the preliminary injunction standard of “substantial likelihood of success on the merits.”
The appeals court’s opinion focused on whether the drag show in question met the legal standard of constituting “expressive conduct,” which is required to implicate the First Amendment. The court defined such conduct as intentionally “convey[ing] one or more messages,” and stated that in this instance “it is evident that a message in support of LGBT+ rights was intended.” The court further stated that the show was to be held in a “designated public forum” open to all, and that the defendants failed to show why it would warrant “selective exclusion.” The appeals court concluded that the “district court erred in concluding that the plaintiffs were not substantially likely to succeed on the merits of their First Amendment claim.”
Spectrum WT, an LGBT+ group at the university, sought a preliminary injunction in March 2023 against University President Walter Wendler’s cancellation of an on-campus drag show. The drag show was intended to fundraise for the Trevor Project, an organization that aims to lower rates of suicide in the LGBT+ community. President Wendler justified the cancellation on the basis that “drag shows are derisive, divisive and demoralizing misogyny” and stated that he would not “condone the diminishment of any group… even when the law of the land appears to require it.” He clarified that his contention was with the drag show itself, rather than its support of the Trevor Project. Following the denial of the injunction, the plaintiffs sought emergency action from the Supreme Court to allow it to hold a show in March 2024. This request was denied.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which represented the plaintiffs, described the appeals court decision as a “victory for student expression on campus.”
This decision has wider implications for the application of First Amendment rights to drag shows, which is a subject of significant ongoing contention. Several states, such as Tennessee and Florida, have passed laws restricting drag performances. These laws have and continue to face constitutional challenges from numerous rights groups.
The post Federal appeals court reverses ban on drag shows at Texas A&M university appeared first on JURIST – News.
Transgender judge appeals to ECHR over UK Supreme Court’s “biological sex” ruling
Dr. Victoria McCloud, the UK’s first openly transgender judge, lodged an appeal on Monday with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) against a Supreme Court ruling that defined “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 solely by biological criteria, excluding transgender women with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs). McCloud had previously sought leave to intervene in the case, but her request was refused without explanation.
The appeal, filed by the Trans Legal Clinic in partnership with W-Legal, invokes Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, arguing that the Supreme Court’s refusal to allow McCloud to intervene in the case breached her right to a fair trial. It highlights the exclusion of transgender voices from judicial proceedings directly affecting their rights, stating: “[f]or the trans community, it embodies a simple truth: there must be no more conversations about us, without us.”
In an interview with The Guardian, McCloud said that the ruling breaches not only Article 6, but also Articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention, which safeguard privacy, family life, and protection from discrimination. She decried the judgment’s practical consequences, including unsafe access to gendered spaces and conflicting legal statuses that, she argued, leave transgender people caught “as two sexes at once” under domestic law.
Among those representing McCloud are Oscar Davies, the UK’s first out non-binary barrister, and Olivia Campbell-Cavendish, the first out Black trans lawyer and founder of the Trans Legal Clinic, which has launched a crowdfunding drive to support the case. According to Trans Legal Clinic’s statement, this marks the first trans-led legal team to bring a case to the ECHR in the UK.
McCloud’s ECHR challenge arrives amid widespread backlash to the ruling. Critics warn that it could undermine transgender protections across public services, schools, and criminal justice, and exacerbate risks within gendered spaces.
The post Transgender judge appeals to ECHR over UK Supreme Court’s “biological sex” ruling appeared first on JURIST – News.
USA: Federal Appeals Court Sides With Religious Ministry That Withdrew Job Offer To Lesbian In A Same-Sex Marriage
Lithuanian court recognises same-sex couple as family for first time
International and Comparative SOGIESC Law - Professor Andreas R Ziegler 