Category Archives: Allgemein

ECtHR: Bednarek v Poland – judg. 10 July 2025 – lack of explicit notion of hate motive in legislation, prosecution, conviction and in determination of punishment – violation

Leave a reply

ECtHR: Bednarek v Poland – judg. 10 July 2025 – lack of explicit notion of hate motive in legislation, prosecution, conviction and in determination of punishment – violation

Art 3 (+ Art 14) • Positive obligations • Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation • Insufficient State response to battery with homophobic overtones committed against the applicants • Treatment to which applicants were subjected reached the threshold of severity to fall under Art 3 • Domestic legal framework did not include sexual orientation among grounds for the commission of hate crime or discrimination offences • Prima facie indications that two of the applicants suffered violence motivated or influenced by prejudice • Despite the authorities investigating and convicting the perpetrators with some consideration to the homophobic context, no charges or prosecution brought for a hate-motivated attack • Attackers’ demonstration of hostility towards applicants due to their perceived sexuality not taken into account in determining punishment • State’s failure to discharge its duty to ensure violent attacks motivated by hostility towards victims’ actual or presumed sexual orientation did not remain without an appropriate response

Judgment : https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-243999%22]}

See : https://www.sexualorientationlaw.eu/documents/80-european-court-of-human-rights

See : https://policehumanrightsresources.org/case-of-bednarek-and-others-v-poland-application-no-58207-14

ECtHR: Minasyan v Armenia (59180/15) judgment | 07.01.2025 (effective legal framework protecting from media attacks against LGBT-activists)

Leave a reply

ECtHR: Minasyan v Armenia (59180/15) judgment | 07.01.2025 (effective legal framework protecting from media attacks against LGBT-activists)

67.  The Court notes, in particular, that the domestic courts gave full weight to the author’s right to freedom of expression and little to no importance to the effect of his statements on the applicants and their private life. In doing so, the courts stressed the fact that the author was a representative of the press reporting on a matter of public interest. The Court reiterates in this connection that the protection afforded by Article 10 of the Convention to journalists is subject to the proviso that they act in good faith in order to provide accurate and reliable information in accordance with the tenets of responsible journalism (see Bédat v. Switzerland [GC], no. 56925/08, § 50, 29 March 2016). Article 10 does not guarantee a wholly unrestricted freedom of expression even with respect to press coverage of matters of serious public concern …

69.  The Court cannot accept as an example of responsible journalism an article propagating hatred, hostility and discrimination against a minority, in this case the LGBT community, which, at the material time, appeared to be one of the main targets of widespread hostility, hate speech and hate‑motivated violence in the country [emphasis added] (see Oganezova, cited above, §§ 87‑122, as well as the ECRI report and the third-party submissions in paragraphs 33 and 51 above respectively), and against those, like the applicants, who were active in promoting and defending the rights of that minority. The domestic courts failed to recognise the author’s hostile tone and intentions and the impact that his statements had on the applicants’ Article 8 rights. His expressions, which were meant to incite intolerance and hostility against the applicants with the clear intention of intimidating them and causing them real harm, were downplayed by the courts and regarded as legitimate expressions of “criticism” in the context of a debate on a matter of public interest. By doing so, the domestic courts failed to protect the applicants from speech advocating intolerance and harmful acts in breach of Article 8 of the Convention.

More: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2259180/15%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-240280%22]}

EU court questions Italy’s ‘safe country’ list for migrants [taking into account the protection of minorities]

Leave a reply

EU court questions Italy’s ‘safe country’ list for migrants [taking into account the protection of minorities]

1 August 2025

While ruling Italy’s plan to fast-track migrant deportations is legal, the European Court of Justice set out some limits. Those include disclosing sources for their assessment of a country being considered “safe.”

A second condition stipulated by the court is that a state can only be designated as a safe country of origin if it offers adequate protection to the entire population, including minorities.

More: https://www.dw.com/en/eu-court-questions-italys-safe-country-list-for-migrants/a-73500838

CJEU: Alace (C-758/24) – judg. 1 Aug 2025 – safe country of origin

See: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?nat=or&mat=or&pcs=Oor&jur=C,T,F&num=C-758%2F24&for=&jge=&dates=&language=en&pro=&cit=none%2CC%2CCJ%2CR%2C2008E%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2Ctrue%2Cfalse%2Cfalse&oqp=&td=;ALL&avg=&lg=&page=1&cid=1830825

“a Member State may not designate as a ‘safe’ country of origin a third country which does not satisfy, for certain categories of persons, the material conditions for such a designation. The new regulation, 4 which allows designations to be made with exceptions for such clearly identifiable categories of persons, will be applicable as from 12 June 2026, but it is open to the EU legislature to bring that date forward.”

Press Release: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2025-08/cp250103en.pdf

Saint Lucia court strikes down gay sex ban

Leave a reply

Saint Lucia court strikes down gay sex ban

Protestors in Saint Lucia condemning the nation's homosexuality laws in 2012.

Protestors in Saint Lucia condemning the nation’s homosexuality laws in 2012. (Getty)

A Saint Lucia court has struck down a set of laws criminalising homosexuality, in a major win for LGBTQ+ rights in the Caribbean.

Judges in the eastern Caribbean nation ruled on Tuesday (29 July) that laws banning so-called “gross indecency” and “buggery” were unconstitutional.

The High Court of Saint Lucia argued that the colonial-era laws unfairly targeted LGBTQ+ people and contravene fundamental human rights, including rights to privacy, freedom of expression, and protection from discrimination.

It is now the fifth country in the Eastern Caribbean region to decriminalise same-sex activity after Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, and St Kitts & Nevis.

Only five countries in the Western Hemisphere continue to ban private, consensual same-sex activity – Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. Trinidad and Tobago decriminalised homosexuality in 2018, but reversed its decision in March 2025.

Saint Lucia prime minister, Philip J Pierre.
Saint Lucia prime minister, Philip J Pierre. (Getty)

Téa Braun, CEO of the Human Dignity Trust, told PinkNews that the ruling marked “another significant legal milestone” for the LGBTQ+ community both in the Caribbean and worldwide.

“[The ruling] demonstrates the importance of the courts when lawmakers fail to respect fundamental human rights,” Braun continued. “We extend our heartfelt congratulations to the litigants and activists who have tirelessly pursued justice.”

Saint Lucia’s anti-gay laws, which were inherited from the British during the colonial period, were retained in 2004 after the island nation updated its Criminal Code. Those found in violation of the law faced up to 10 years’ imprisonment.

In 2021, a human rights tribunal found that laws criminalising homosexuality violate international fundamental human rights laws.

You may like to watch

Issued by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the ruling found that the Jamaican government had violated multiple international laws by criminalising homosexuality in the nation.

Despite the ruling, homosexuality is still illegal in the region, which is among one of the worst for LGBTQ+ rights, according to Equaldex.

More: https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/07/30/saint-lucia-court-homosexuality/