A “Living Instrument” For Everyone: The Role of the European Convention on Human Rights in Advancing Equality for LGBTI Persons – Conference to mark the 70th anniversary of the European Convention on Human Rights – Date 8 October 2020, livestream

Location Seminar Room, Human Rights Building (avenue de l’Europe Strasbourg
F-67075 France)

Digital: livestream:

To join as VIEWER (BROADCAST MEETING):

https://vmeeting.coe.int/br/111111789326

*For smartphones and tablets: application Kudo Live and ID 111111789326

CONCEPT NOTE

The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, better known as the European
Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”), opened for signature in Rome on 4 November 1950, is perhaps
the most successful and illustrious international legal instrument in the history of humanity. It enshrines the
view that common understanding and observance of human rights, together with an effective political
democracy, are prerequisites for ensuring justice and peace on the European continent. The Convention
catalogues the fundamental rights and freedoms that represent the core values of a liberal democracy and
establishes a mechanism to hold the High Contracting Parties accountable at a supranational level for the
violations of these rights imputable either directly or indirectly to a State.

This supervisory mechanism (“the Convention mechanism”) is a shared responsibility between the State Parties
and the European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”), established on 21 January 1959 “to ensure the
observance of the engagements undertaken by the High Contracting Parties in the Convention and Protocols
thereto”. The Court’s approach to the exercise of its powers to interpret the Convention is based on the premise
that the latter is “a living instrument which must be interpreted in the light of present-day conditions and of the
ideas prevailing in democratic States today” in a manner “consistent with the general spirit of the Convention,
an instrument designed to maintain and promote the ideals and values of a democratic state”. Over the course
of the past seven decades, the Convention has evolved to reflect the rapid evolution of societal norms and
attitudes in every area of human life, including sexual orientation and gender identity.

Sexual orientation and gender identity are aspects of who we are. To be denied the effective enjoyment of the
right to freedom of private and/or family life, of expression, or of assembly, to be ostracised or assaulted on
account of one’s perceived failure to fit in the strictly construed societal mould of gender roles is to be denied
the opportunity to exercise autonomy over one’s life.

Equality, pluralism and tolerance are notions inherent in a democratic society. Seeing democracy as one of the
most progressive achievements of humanity, the Court has consistently put a strong emphasis on the need to
protect an individual from the oppression by the majority. In the Court’s own words, “although individual
interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group, democracy does not simply mean that the views
of a majority must always prevail: a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of
people from minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position”.

The Convention mechanism is undeniably far from perfect. However, notwithstanding multiple limitations
inherent in the functioning of a supranational arbiter, an application to the Court remains a powerful – and, in
some instances, the only – tool to assert a claim to equality that has its practical uses. LGBTI persons within the
jurisdiction of a Member State of the Council of Europe seeking redress against alleged violations of the rights
and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention have a vested interest in accessing information on examples of a
successful litigation of a case involving a SOGIESC element.

The primary purpose of the Conference is to celebrate the achievements in advancing equality for LGBTI persons
with a view to bringing a SOGIESC issue before national jurisdictions and before the Court. It is addressed both
to legal professionals and members of the general public interested in the topic. Another important aim of this
Conference is to bring together a wide range of actors, including Judges of the Court, representatives of various
bodies of the Council of Europe, and representatives of civil society with a view to approach the themes under
discussion in a transversal manner.

The Conference will focus on three major topics: (i) the situation of transgender persons; (ii) same sex civil unions
and equal marriage; (iii) hate speech directed at LGBTI persons.

PROGRAMME

October 2020

Venue

Time

Seminar Room (Human Rights Building, rez-de-jardin)

9.20 a.m. – 3.10 p.m. Central European Time

9 a.m.

Registration of the participants present on-site

9.20 a.m.

Screening of a short film

Testimonials by applicants

9.30 a.m.

Opening remarks

Gabriella Battaini-Dragoni, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe
Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Registrar and Registrar-elect of the ECHR

9.45 a.m.

Keynote speech

Robert Spano, President of the European Court of Human Rights

Panel I

The long road to ensuring respect for human dignity of transgender persons:
Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom and the Court’s subsequent case-law

Moderator

Jeroen Schokkenbroek, Director of Anti-Discrimination, Council of Europe

The Christine Goodwin judgment was a remarkable success when it was adopted
in 2002. It gave momentum to an important reform at the national level that
resulted in the adoption of the UK Gender Recognition Act 2004. Moreover, this
judgment played a pivotal role in the success of the litigation brought by Ms Lydia
Foy before the Irish courts, which, in its turn, led to the adoption of the Irish
Gender Recognition Act 2015. However, the Christine Goodwin judgment was a
milestone on the long road, not the end of it. Has Europe made further advances
as regards equality for transgender persons?

10.30 a.m.

Michael Farrell, First Vice-Chair, European Commission against Racism and
Intolerance; Counsel to Ms Lydia Foy

10.40 a.m.

Clare Brown, Head of Section, Department for the Execution of Judgments of the
ECHR

10.50 a.m.

Masen Davis, Interim Executive Director, TGEU

11 a.m.

Panel discussion

11.15 a.m.

Questions and Answers

11.30 a.m.

Break: disinfection of the room

Panel II

Oliari and Others v. Italy – a success story in the field of recognition and
protection of same-sex civil unions

Moderator

Breifne O’Reilly, Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Ireland to the Council
of Europe

The Oliari and Others judgment and the Legge Cirinnà adopted in response to it
give a brilliant example of the capacity of the Convention human-rights protection
mechanism to bring about an important societal change in a relatively short span
of time through close cooperation between various actors responsible for the
mechanism (in particular, the Court itself, the Department for the Execution of
Judgments of the ECHR, and the national authorities). Could this successful
example be reproduced in the Member States of the Council of Europe that have
not granted legal recognition to same-sex couples?

11.45 a.m.

Yonko Grozev, Judge and Section President, European Court of Human Rights

11.55 a.m.

Robert Wintemute, Professor of Human Rights Law, School of Law, King’s College
London

12 noon

Matteo Fiori, Lawyer, Department for the Execution of Judgments of the ECHR

12.05 p.m.

Giuseppe Maria Mezzapesa, Counsellor, Italian Court of Audit, and expert of
UNAR – Italian Equality Body

12.15 p.m.

Géraldine Mattioli-Zeltner, Adviser, Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights

12.25 p.m.

Panel discussion

12.35 p.m.

Questions and Answers

12.45 p.m.

Lunch break

Panel II

Hate speech directed at LGBTI persons: a new frontier. Cases of Beizaras and
Levickas v. Lithuania and Lilliendahl v. Iceland

Moderator

Nina Nordström, Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Finland to the
Council of Europe

Freedom of expression is undoubtedly one of the essential foundations of a
democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each
individual’s self-fulfilment, but does it include the right to verbally attack another
person solely because of their sexual orientation or gender identity? In 2020, the
Court’s answer is an emphatic ‘no’. In two recently adopted ground-breaking legal
acts, the Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania judgment and the Lilliendahl v. Iceland
decision, the Court took a stand against hurtful and hateful online comments
directed at LGBTI persons.

2 p.m.

Egidijus Kūris, Judge, European Court of Human Rights

2.10 p.m.

Arpi Avetisyan, Senior Litigation Officer, ILGA-Europe

2.20 p.m.

Patrick Penninckx, Head of Information Society Department, Council of Europe

2.30 p.m.

Panel discussion

2.45 p.m.

Questions and Answers

3 p.m.

Concluding remarks

Jeroen Schokkenbroek

UK: Michael Cashman asked the government to explain where in the world cis men have abused self-ID to hurt women. They couldn’t

Michael Cashman posed a simple question to a Tory government minister: When has a cisgender man ever self-identified as a woman to commit crimes?

The response? Silence.

Conservative peer Elizabeth Berridge, a junior minister for women, fielded questions from the House of Lords Friday morning (September 25), regarding her boss Liz Truss’ decision to abandon reforms to the Gender Recognition Act.

Among them was Stonewall co-founder Cashman, a non-affiliated peer. He grilled Berridge on the government’s “woefully inadequate” response to a public consultation which revealed strong public support for trans people’s right to self-identification.

Appearing via video uplink, Cashman said Truss’ response “fails to take into account the Government’s own consultation”.

“This is at a time when gross defamation and gross misrepresentation on trans people, particularly trans women, has been whipped up by the media and by some members of your lordship’s house,” he continued, an LGBT+ Pride flag hanging behind him and a trans Pride pin adorning his tie.

Cashman asked Berridge to explain “how the government will address the real needs of trans people, as indicated overwhelmingly in the consultation”.

He further asked her to clarify Truss’ statement, “when the secretary of state said: ‘Self-declaration would be abused by men.’”

The barbed whataboutery of a cisgender man self-identifying as a woman to commit acts of violence is frequently wielded like a club by anti-trans campaigners without evidence.

Cashman continued: “What evidence of widespread abuse does the secretary of state have from other jurisdictions that have moved to self-ID, or does the secretary of state believe British men are uniquely abusive?”

A stuttering Berridge returned to the despatch box, saying the government believes self-identification needs “formality”. Cashman burrowed his brow as she added: “We do not believe we need to move away from the current system.”

Despite Cashman ending his comments with a clear and concise question, Berridge failed to respond with what “evidence”, if any, there is of “abuse” of self-ID.

She instead peeled off commitments by the government, such as the lord commissioners being alerted to the spikes in transphobic hate crimes, as well as the appointment of Dr Michael Brady to advise “NHS England and others about healthcare for LGBT people.”

Read: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/25/michael-cashman-gender-recognition-act-self-id-house-of-lords-lizz-truss-elizabeth-berridge/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PNnewsletter

Interesting Article: Member-on-Member Sexual and Gender- Based Crimes as War Crimes: Towards the Autonomy of Individual Criminal Responsibility from Underlying Violations of International Humanitarian Law?

Full quote: Giuseppe Nesi & Luca Poltronieri Rossetti, Member-on-Member Sexual and Gender- Based Crimes as War Crimes: Towards the Autonomy of Individual Criminal Responsibility from Underlying Violations of International Humanitarian Law?, in: La Comunità Internazionale (Vol. 75, no. 3, 2020)

USA: Minnesota appeals court rules students must be allowed to use locker rooms corresponding with gender identity

A Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled Monday that students must be allowed to use locker rooms that align with their gender identity.

The appeal stems from a case in which a transgender high school student, referred to as N.H., was threatened discipline should he continue to use the boys’ locker room. N.H. was born female but has socially transitioned to male. During his freshman year, N.H. joined the boys swim team and was initially allowed to use the boys’ locker room. Later, N.H.’s mother was informed that N.H. would be disciplined should he continue to use the main boys’ locker room.

In 2019, N.H.’s mother filed suit in Anoka County “alleging one count of violating the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) … and one count of violating the equal-protection provisions of article I, sections 1 and 7 of the Minnesota Constitution, and withdrew the charge filed at the MDHR.” The district court denied the school district’s motion to dismiss the suit but applied a strict scrutiny standard to N.H.’s claims.

The appeals court ultimately concluded that N.H. presented a claim upon which relief could be granted. “We affirm the district court’s denial of the school district’s motion to dismiss, reverse on the application of strict scrutiny, conclude that intermediate scrutiny applies to N.H.’s equal-protection claim, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

The post Minnesota appeals court rules students must be allowed to use locker rooms corresponding with gender identity appeared first on JURIST – News – Legal News & Commentary.

Open letter of the Ambassadors of Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, the United States and Venezuela, as well as the General Representative of the Flemish Community and the Flemish Region, the General Delegate of the French Community and the Walloon Region, the Representatives in Poland of the European Commission and of the UNHCR, the First Deputy Director/Director’s alternate of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, the Head of Office of the International Organization for Migration and the Secretary General of the Community of Democracies.

This letter has been coordinated by the Embassy of the Kingdom of Belgium in Poland.

Although due to epidemiological circumstances the 2020 Warsaw Equality Parade could not take place at the foreseen date we express our support for the efforts to raise public awareness of issues affecting the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) community and other communities in Poland facing similar challenges.

We also acknowledge similar efforts in Białystok, Bielsko–Biała, Częstochowa, Gniezno, Kalisz, Katowice, Kielce, Koszalin, Kraków, Lublin, Łódź, Nowy Sącz, Olsztyn, Opole, Płock, Poznań, Rzeszów, Szczecin, Tarnów, Toruń, Trójmiasto, Włocławek, Wrocław and Zielona Góra.

We affirm the inherent dignity of each individual as expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Respect for these fundamental rights, which are also enshrined in OSCE commitments and the obligations and standards of the Council of Europe and the European Union as communities of rights and values, obliges governments to protect all citizens from violence and discrimination and to ensure they enjoy equal opportunities.

To this end, and in particular to shield communities in need of protection from verbal and physical abuse and hate speech, we need to jointly work on an environment of non-discrimination, tolerance and mutual acceptance.

This includes in particular sectors such as education, health, social affairs, citizenship, public service and public documents.

We pay tribute to the hard work of LGBTI and other communities in Poland and around the world, as well as the work of all those who seek to ensure human rights for LGBTI and other persons belonging to communities facing similar challenges, and to end discrimination in particular on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Human rights are universal and everyone, including LGBTI persons, are entitled to their full enjoyment.

This is something that everyone should support.

Signed,

H.E. Shpresa Kureta, Ambassador of the Republic of Albania

H.E. Ana María Ramírez, Ambassador of the Argentine Republic

H.E. Lloyd David Hargreave Brodrick, Ambassador of Australia

H.E. Werner Almhofer, Ambassador of Austria

H.E. Luc Jacobs, Ambassador of the Kingdom of Belgium

H.E. Leslie Scanlon, Ambassador of Canada

H.E. Tomislav Vidošević, Ambassador of the Republic of Croatia

H.E. Petros Kestoras, Ambassador of Republic of Cyprus

H.E. Ivan Jestřáb, Ambassador of the Czech Republic

H.E. Ole Toft, Royal Ambassador of Denmark

H.E. Aníbal de Castro, Ambassador of the Dominican Republic

H.E. Juha Ottman, Ambassador of Finland

H.E. Frédéric Billet, Ambassador of France

H.E. Arndt Freytag von Loringhoven, Ambassador of Germany

H.E. Michael-Efstratios C. Daratzikis, Ambassador of the Hellenic Republic

H.E. María Erla Marelsdóttir, Ambassador of Iceland

H.E. Tsewang Namgyal, Ambassador of India

H.E. Emer O’Connell, Ambassador of Ireland

H.E. Alexander Ben-Zvi, Ambassador of Israel

H.E. Aldo Amati, Ambassador of Italy

H.E. Tsukasa Kawada, Ambassador of Japan

H.E. Edgars Bondars, Ambassador of Latvia

H.E. Eduardas Borisovas, Ambassador of the Republic of Lithuania

H.E. Paul Schmit, Ambassador of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

H.E. John Paul Grech, Ambassador of Malta

H.E. Alejandro Negrín, Ambassador of Mexico

H.E. Budimir Šegrt, Ambassador of Montenegro

H.E. Daphne Bergsma, Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands

H.E. Mary Thurston, Ambassador of New Zealand

H.E. Vasil Panovski, Ambassador of the Republic of North Macedonia

H.E. Anders Eide, Ambassador of the Kingdom of Norway

H.E. Luís Manuel Ribeiro Cabaço, Ambassador of Portugal

H.E. Dario Galassi, Ambassador of San Marino

H.E. Nikola Zurovac, Ambassador of the Republic of Serbia

H.E. Božena Forštnarič Boroje, Ambassador of Slovenia

Daniel StemmerChargė D’ Affaires a.i., Embassy of South Africa

H.E. Francisco Javier Sanabria Valderrama, Ambassador of Spain

H.E. Stefan Gullgren, Ambassador of Sweden

H.E. Jürg Burri, Ambassador of Switzerland

H.E. Andrii Deshchytsia, Ambassador of Ukraine

H.E. Anna Clunes, Ambassador of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

H.E. Georgette Mosbacher, Ambassador of the United States of America

H.E. Luis Gómez Urdaneta, Ambassador of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Dries Willems, General Representative of the Flemish Community and the Flemish Region

Anne Defourny, General Delegate of the French Community and the Walloon Region

Katarzyna Gardapkhadze, First Deputy Director/Director’s alternate of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights ODIHR

Marek Prawda, Head of Representation, European Commission in Poland

Christine Goyer, Representative, UNHCR Representation in Poland

Thomas E. Garrett, Secretary General of the Community of Democracies

Hanna Dobrzyńska, Director, International Organization for Migration (IOM)

By U.S. Mission Poland | 27 September, 2020 | Topics: Events, Human Rights, News

See: https://pl.usembassy.gov/open_letter/

See: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54317902

Opinion: As non-binary people, do we really want legal recognition, or should we be fighting to abolish gender categories entirely? (C Benedict)

C Benedict is the presenter of NB: My Non-binary Life on BBC Sounds, an audio presenter and producer. They make work about identity and the arts for radio, podcasts and online.

Read: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/23/non-binary-gender-recognition-act-abolish-c-benedict/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PNnewsletter

Germany: Claim to Lipofilling: Trans woman wins in court

Die Krankenkasse muss einer trans Frau die Eigenfett-Transplantation “bis zur Fertigstellung der Brust” genehmigen, urteilte das Landessozialgericht Rheinland-Pfalz. Das Verhalten der Kasse rügte es als “zynisch”.

Read: https://www.queer.de/detail.php?article_id=37144&pk_campaign=Nwsl

USA: Trump order bans certain diversity training for federal contractors, grantees, military

US President Donald Trump issued an executive order Tuesday that bans workplace diversity training with certain characteristics for federal contractors, grantees and military.

The executive order bans workplace diversity training with the following characteristics:

The contractor shall not use any workplace training that inculcates in its employees any form of race or sex stereotyping or any form of race or sex scapegoating, including the concepts that (a) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex; (b) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; (c) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex; (d) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex; (e) an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex; (f) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex; (g) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or (h) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race. The term “race or sex stereotyping” means ascribing character traits, values, moral and ethical codes, privileges, status, or beliefs to a race or sex, or to an individual because of his or her race or sex, and the term “race or sex scapegoating” means assigning fault, blame, or bias to a race or sex, or to members of a race or sex because of their race or sex.

In reference to the order, Trump tweeted, “A few weeks ago, I BANNED efforts to indoctrinate government employees with divisive and harmful sex and race-based ideologies. Today, I’ve expanded that ban to people and companies that do business with our Country, the United States Military, Government Contractors, and Grantees. Americans should be taught to take PRIDE in our Great Country, and if you don’t, there’s nothing in it for you!”

This executive order follows after the president issued a memo earlier this month that banned the diversity training described in the recent executive order for federal executive agency employees.

The post Trump order bans certain diversity training for federal contractors, grantees, military appeared first on JURIST – News – Legal News & Commentary.

UK: Non-binary and gender fluid people protected under the Equality Act after landmark ruling against Jaguar Land Rover

Read: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/17/jaguar-land-rover-employment-tribunal-non-binary-gender-fluid/

Bolivia: civil unions are for everyone! (Sign the Petition)

In October 2018, David and Guido tried to register their relationship as a Free Union (which, according to Bolivian law, has the same effects as civil marriage, or a civil union). But when the time came for the Civic Registration Service to actually register their union… They just refused to do it.

That started a legal battle. In July 2020, they had great news: the Second Constitutional Chamber of La Paz, in the capital of Bolivia, issued a resolution that would allow the formal recognition of David and Guido’s relationship as a registered and certified Free Union!

All was looking very promising until it was time to go to the Civic Registration Service, and they – once more – refused to comply and register the Union.

The Service even requested that the Bolivian Constitutional Court suspend the resolution, so they could continue denying equal rights to David and Guido – and to all same-sex couples!

This decision is now in the hands of the country’s Constitutional Justice.

The Second Constitutional Chamber should order the Civic Registration Service to act in accordance with the resolution.

If they do so and recognize David and Guido’s union, it will create an important precedent for the equality of LGBT+ people in Bolivia!

Sign the petition and tell Bolivia: civil unions are for everyone!

Sign here: https://action.allout.org/en/a/unionlibre/?akid=45469.3722052.FSrHwY&rd=1&t=4&utm_campaign=unionlibre-104e3ec4&utm_medium=email&utm_source=actionsuite#form-section

***

This is a campaign of the Comunidad de Derechos Humanos Bolivia.