This is a blog is related to my academic work in the International Academic Forum on SOGIESC Law but meant to serve anyone who wants to contribute to improve the protection of human rights worldwide. It is intended to keep interested readers informed about legal developments relating to sexual orientation, gender expression and identity and sex characteristics (SOGIESC). Hopefully, it will make it easier to find correct legal information about the developments in all regions of the world and, in particular, with regard to international law.
Interesting Article on England: Faith-based objections to the inclusion of LGBT content in relationships education in
Dr Silvia Falcetta and Paul Johnson have made available a draft of a new research article, which examines faith-based objections to the inclusion of LGBT content in “relationships education” in primary schools in England.
In the article they critically examine on-going faith-based claims that the inclusion of LGBT content in primary schools violates the human rights and fundamental freedoms of parents.
Here is the abstract:
All primary schools in England are under a statutory requirement to provide “relationships education”, which includes “LGBT content”. The inclusion of content relating to sexual orientation and gender identity has attracted faith-based opposition. Such opposition, which is based on assertions about relationships education interfering with the right of parents to ensure that the education of their children is in conformity with their religious convictions, is likely to lead to legal action in the English courts and perhaps the European Court of Human Rights. This article anticipates the claims that would be made in any legal action and critically interrogates them through the lens of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe will conduct a remote fact-finding mission on 2 and 3 November 2020 on the situation of LGBTI+ people in Poland
USA: Federal judge allows transgender discrimination claims against Georgia county to continue
Chief Judge Marc Treadwell of the US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia began her 37-page opinion by addressing the Sheriff’s Office’s Sovereign Immunity affirmative defense. She concluded that the Sheriff’s Office failed to show it was acting as “an arm of the state” and denied the motion to dismiss.
The judge also reviewed the Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). According to the court, Lange sufficiently plead her gender dysphoria as a disability under the act. However, the court ultimately granted the motion to dismiss the ADA claim “[b]ecause the [health insurance] Plan [was] equally available to all employees and Lange [] pleaded no facts suggesting otherwise.”
Finally, Judge Treadwell dismissed Lange’s Rehabilitation Act claim and her Federal Equal Protection claims against the Sheriff individually as well as the other county employees. Though the court dismissed those claims, it allowed Lange’s sex discrimination claims under Title VII to go forward, citing Bostock v. Clayton County. Lange’s ADA Title I and Federal Equal Protection claims against both the county and Sheriff’s Office were also allowed to continue.
Nigeria high court drops case against 47 men accused of violating homosexuality law
Nigeria Federal High Court Justice Rilwan Aikawa has struck out a case against 47 men accused of violating Nigeria’s law against homosexual relationships, including gay marriage, due to “the lack of diligent prosecution.”
The men faced charges relating to public displays of affection with the same sex, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. The men were arrested at the Lagos hotel in 2018. Police claim the men were being initiated into a gay club while the men claim they were attending a birthday party.
The court had adjourned the case on several occasions with the prosecution failing to present witnesses. The prosecution also failed to show up to Tuesday’s hearing.
Under Nigeria’s laws, when a case is struck out, it means that the accused can be arrested and arraigned again on the same charge. In contrast, when a case is dismissed, the accused cannot be arrested again on the same charge. Nonetheless, people were heard cheering after Justice Aikawa announced the verdict.
European Union citizens have the right to move and live freely across the EU. But this does not apply to many same-sex couples and rainbow families.
The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, recently said she will push for recognition of rainbow families everywhere in the EU because “If you are a parent in one country, you are a parent in every country.”
Andreas, it’s time to dial up the pressure and tell the European Union to turn these words into action.
Spain: Because of concealed homosexuality: Spaniard has to compensate ex-wife
A judgment triggers outrage in Spain. A man has to pay 3,000 euros for not telling his ex about his homosexual relationships.
Spain’s Minister for Gender Equality Mónica Oltra demands that the law be examined Photo: Bernat Armangue / ap
MADRID taz | Does a man have to tell his wife that he had homosexual relationships before marriage? A judge in the Spanish Mediterranean city of Valencia says: Yes. She sentenced the lawyer Javier Vilalta to 3,000 euros in compensation – 1,000 euros per year of marriage – to his ex-wife. She also annulled her marriage, which was divorced in 2011. The convicted person, who stated in the trial to be bisexual, wants to appeal against “the terrible verdict”. He never cheated on his wife and he married her out of love. “My wife knows I was totally straight during the marriage,” added Vilalta.
This is not enough for the judge. She sees “the deliberate concealment” of his past life by the convicted “fraud”. According to a law from 1889, the marriage was therefore invalid, she declared, against the criteria of the defense lawyers and the prosecution. The marriage had been divorced by mutual consent in 2011. Both remained friends, said the convict. He even introduced a male partner to his ex in 2016.
In 2019 the woman finally went to court on the advice of her friends to have the marriage declared “null and void”. In the lawsuit, the woman alleged, among other things, that she experienced “major social rejection” after the divorce.
The Spanish Association of Lesbians, Gays, Transgender and Bisexuals (FELGTB) speaks of a “reactionary judgment”. The “moral trial” is a “worrying precedent”. The judgment is directed against the basic constitutional rights. “The verdict is an indication to society that anyone who has a sex life outside the norm can come to court and be convicted,” explains FELGTB spokeswoman Uge Sangil.
The Minister of Equality demands that the law be examined
“Nobody should be forced to speak up about their sexual orientation,” complains the deputy head of government and minister for equality and inclusive politics of the Valencia region. Mónica Oltra, about the verdict. Oltra is demanding that the legislature review the 1889 law on which the judgment is based. After all, the concept of the “nullity” of a marriage comes from a time when divorce was impossible.
Cases such as Vilalta are almost non-existent in civil law. When marriages are declared “null”, this is done in Spain before church institutions. It is about couples who are so strictly religious that they do not want to get a civil divorce, as this makes another church wedding impossible.
This article explores the definition of ‘sportswoman’ as put forward in the Caster Semenya case (2019) and the Dutee Chand case (2015) before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). It analyses the structural and discursive factors that made it possible for the CAS to endorse a definition that reduces sex and gender to a matter concerning testosterone. By relying on the concept of intersectionality and analytical sensibilities from Critical Legal Studies, the article shows that framing the cases as a matter of scientific dispute, instead of as concerning human rights, significantly influenced the CAS decisions. Moreover, structural elements of international sports law, such as the lack of knowledge of human rights among CAS arbitrators and a history of institutionalising gendered and racialised body norms through sporting regulations, further aided the affirmation of the ‘testosterone rules’.
