Asia
UN human rights experts condemn Taliban over treatment of LGBTQ Afghans
Extremist group regained control of country on Aug. 15, 2021

United Nations human rights experts on Monday sharply criticized the Taliban over its treatment of LGBTQ and intersex people and other groups in Afghanistan.
“Two years ago, the Taliban seized power in Afghanistan. Since then, the policies they have imposed on the Afghan population have resulted in a continuous, systematic and shocking rescinding of a multitude of human rights, including the rights to education, work and freedoms of expression, assembly and association. Consistent credible reports of summary executions and acts tantamount to enforced disappearances, widespread arbitrary detention, torture, and ill treatment, as well as arbitrary displacement have caused increased concern,” reads a statement that Victor Madrigal-Borloz, the independent U.N. expert on LGBTQ and intersex issues, and others signed. “The hardest hit are women and girls, ethnic, religious and other minorities, people with disabilities, displaced persons, LGBTQ+ persons, human rights defenders and other civil society actors, journalists, artists, educators and former government and security officials.”
“Despite reassurances by the Taliban de facto authorities that any restrictions, particularly in terms of access to education would be temporary, the facts on the ground have demonstrated an accelerated, systematic and all engulfing system of segregation, marginalization and persecution,” the statement further notes.
The Taliban regained control of Afghanistan on Aug. 15, 2021. The last American forces withdrew from the country 15 days later.
The State Department in its 2022 human rights report notes the Taliban “criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual activity, and representatives routinely enforced this position through violence, intimidation, harassment and targeted killings.”
“Under sharia, conviction of same-sex sexual conduct is punishable by death, flogging or imprisonment,” reads the report. “Individual Taliban members made public statements reiterating that their interpretation of sharia includes the death penalty for homosexuality.”
The report further notes the Taliban “takeover of the country increased fears of repression and violence among LGBTQI+ persons, with many individuals going into hiding to avoid being captured by the Taliban. Many fled the country after August 2021. LGBTQI+ persons faced increased threats, attacks, sexual assaults, and discrimination from Taliban members, strangers, neighbors and family members.”
Outright International and Human Rights Watch in January 2022 released a report that includes interviews with LGBTQ and intersex Afghans who the Taliban have targeted. They include a 20 year-old man who said Taliban members “loaded him into a car” at a checkpoint and “took him to another location where four men whipped and then gang raped him over the course of eight hours.” The report also notes the Taliban beat a transgender woman in Kabul, the Afghan capital, and “shaved her eyebrows with a razor” before they “dumped her on the street in men’s clothes and without a cellphone.”
India
Madras High Court says families are possible outside marriage
May 22 ruling could set important legal precedent in India

In a significant moment for India’s LGBTQ community ahead of Pride month, the Madras High Court on May 22 affirmed people can form families outside of marriage.
The decision, handed down by Justices G.R. Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayanan, emphasized “marriage is not the sole mode to found a family,” recognizing the concept of “chosen families” as a well-established principle in LGBTQ jurisprudence.
A two judge Madras High Court panel ordered the release of a 25-year-old lesbian woman who had been forcibly separated from her partner and subjected to harassment by her birth family.
The Madras High Court sharply criticized the local police for their mishandling of the case, condemning their decision to force the woman back to her parents against her will. The two judges denounced the police’s “rank inaction” and insensitivity, emphasizing that government officials, particularly law enforcement, are obligated to respond swiftly and appropriately to complaints from LGBTQ people, ensuring their rights and safety are upheld.
The Madras High Court expressed unease with the term “queer,” noting its dictionary definitions as “strange” or “odd.” The judges questioned the appropriateness of the label in the context of describing LGBTQ identities, urging sensitivity in language to reflect the community’s dignity and rights.
“For a homosexual individual, their sexual orientation is natural and normal,” said the judges. “There is nothing strange about such inclinations. Why then should they be labeled queer?”
The Madras High Court judges observed that not all parents embrace their children’s identities, unfavorably comparing the detained woman’s mother to late-Justice Leila Seth, who publicly supported her son’s sexual orientation. The panel highlighted Seth’s acceptance as a model for familial understanding, underscoring the need for greater societal compassion toward LGBTQ people.
“The mother of the detenue is no Leila Seth,” said the court. “We understand her desire for her daughter to live a conventional heterosexual life, marry, and settle down. However, as an adult, the detenue is entitled to choose her own path.”
The Madras High Court emphasized the concept of “family” must be understood expansively, citing the Supreme Court marriage equality case and other precedents. These international guidelines affirm that all people, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, are entitled to the full spectrum of human rights, reinforcing the court’s stance on recognizing chosen families within the LGBTQ community.
“While the Supriyo case may not have legalized marriage between same-sex couples, they can very well form a family,” the court said in its order. “The concept of ‘chosen family’ is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence. The petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family.”
The Madras High Court referenced Supriyo Chakraborty v. Union of India, which is the marriage equality case on which the Supreme Court ruled in 2023.
The Supreme Court in that ruling declined to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples, but recognized the rights of queer people to form families and urged the government to explore civil union protections, bolstering the court’s call for an expanded understanding of family.
The Madras High Court invoked landmark rulings, including NALSA v. Union of India (2014), which affirmed the right to self-identify as one’s gender, Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), which decriminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations, and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018), which upheld the right to marry by choice as a fundamental right. The two judges reaffirmed sexual orientation is an individual choice, falling within the ambit of personal liberty protected under Article 21 of the constitution.
Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, stating no person shall be deprived of these rights except through lawful procedure. This fundamental right has been expansively interpreted by courts to encompass dignity, privacy, and autonomy, including protections for sexual orientation and other individual identities.
Souvik Saha, an LGBTQ activist and founder of People for Change, a leading Indian advocacy group, described the Madras High Court’s recognition of chosen families as both a relief and a validation of the community’s lived realities.
“As the founder of Jamshedpur Queer Circle and someone who has worked closely with LGBTQ+ individuals navigating rejection, violence, and social isolation, for decades, queer, and trans persons in India have built nurturing ecosystems outside their biological families — often due to rejection, abuse, or lack of acceptance,” said Saha. “This concept of ‘chosen family’ is not new to us; it’s a survival mechanism, a source of healing, and a space where we find dignity, belonging, and love. The fact that the judiciary now formally acknowledges these relationships marks a progressive and humane shift in how family is legally and socially understood.”
Saha shared the story of S, a transgender man from Jamshedpur whose biological family disowned him at 17.
Finding refuge with a queer couple who became his guardians, S received emotional support, celebrated milestones like birthdays, and was guided through education and gender-affirming healthcare. “Isn’t that family?” asked Saha.
Saha told the Washington Blade the Madras High Court’s ruling sparks hope for legal reforms; particularly in securing adoption, inheritance, and caregiving rights for queer people. He said the decision affirms that queer lives are not deviant but diverse, vibrant, and capable of forming loving, responsible families. Most crucially, Saha noted, it sends a powerful message to queer youth in Jamshedpur and other smaller cities that their lives and relationships are valid and valued.
“This ruling is a step forward, but we must be honest. Legal rulings alone won’t change police behavior unless they are followed by systemic structural reforms,” said Saha. “Policing in India is still deeply patriarchal, casteist, and heteronormative. Many officers still view LGBTQ identities as criminal or immoral, even after Section 377 was struck down in 2018.”
Saha said mandatory sensitization programs in every police academy are needed to transform attitudes. He said the inclusion of queer rights in law enforcement curricula — beyond token workshops — are also important. Saha added the recruitment of LGBTQ liaison officers and the formation of compliant mechanisms at the district level is needed.
“This ruling is a strong message from the judiciary, but unless the Ministry of Home Affairs and state police departments institutionalize this into practice, change will remain slow and uneven,” said Saha.
Japan
Japan should end abusive detention conditions for transgender people
Mistreatment exacerbated by ‘hostage justice’ system

Tomoya Asanuma, a prominent transgender activist in Tokyo, faced the triple abuses of Japan’s “hostage justice” system, hostile detention conditions, and mistreatment trans people face in the absence of meaningful legal protections.
For Asanuma, March 14, 2024, was supposed to be another Thursday at work. At around 7 a.m., he woke up to the sound of someone repeatedly ringing his doorbell. Through the intercom, Asanuma saw three men wearing dark-colored clothes, this time pounding his front door. When he opened the door, the men identified themselves as police officers and showed him an arrest warrant.
This was the beginning of what Asanuma recently described to Human Rights Watch as being “difficult to put into words.” After Japanese police arrested him for sexual assault for allegedly hugging an acquaintance from behind, the authorities held him for months at a pre-trial detention center.
During this time, they mocked his transgender identity during interrogation, denied him access to medical services such as dental care, and initially denied hormone treatment until he obtained a recommendation from a doctor.
While some authorities showed a level of consideration for Asanuma, including letting him shower away from other detained men, the abusive treatment he faced led him to attempt suicide twice.
Trans people in Japan are in legal limbo. Historically, they have faced outright discrimination — including a law compelling them to be surgically sterilized for legal gender recognition — and barriers to accessing education, employment, and health care. A landmark Supreme Court decision in 2023 declared the sterilization requirement unconstitutional, but reform has stalled in parliament — leaving trans people’s basic rights in limbo.
The courts finally granted bail to Asanuma in July 2024 and found him not guilty in January 2025. But in a country with a 99.8 percent conviction rate for indicted cases, Asanuma had to live through acute fear as authorities forcibly tried to obtain a confession from him during interrogations without the presence of his lawyer.
His fears are grounded in a justice system with a well-earned reputation for abuse and arbitrariness. His experience is part of systemic treatment in Japan called “hostage justice,” under which criminal suspects are detained for prolonged periods, sometimes months or years, unless they confess to the charges. This denies them the rights to due process and a fair trial.
The authorities ultimately dropped the sexual assault allegations, but charged Asanuma with assault, which is punishable by up to two years in prison or up to a 300,000 yen fine ($2,000.) Prosecutors sought a 200,000 yen fine. Despite this, because he pleaded not guilty, a court rejected his request for bail four times and detained him for more than 100 days in pre-trial detention, punishing him disproportionately since the prosecutors did not even seek imprisonment for his alleged crime.
In Japan’s hostage justice system, authorities frequently subject suspects to harsh interrogations to coerce confessions from them during pre-indictment detention. Defense lawyers are not permitted to be present, and the questioning does not stop even when a suspect invokes their constitutional right to remain silent. Indeed, Asanuma invoked his right to remain silent, but authorities interrogated him for hours on 13 occasions.
The case of Iwao Hakamata highlights the dangers of this practice. Hakamata, a former professional boxer, was arrested on Aug. 18, 1966, for murdering a family of four. Following harsh interrogations by the police and prosecutors, he confessed nearly a month later. Based on this coerced confession, Hakamata was indicted and subsequently convicted and sentenced to death. He maintained his innocence and was eventually acquitted — 58 years after his arrest — on Sept. 26, 2024, following a retrial.
To prevent further abuses and wrongful convictions spurred by the “hostage justice” system, the Japanese government should not as a general rule deny bail to suspects in pretrial detention, and should end interrogations without legal counsel that often involve coerced confessions through manipulation and intimidation.
The Japanese government should also improve the conditions under which suspects are being held, including by ensuring adequate access to all medical services, and revising the Notice Regarding Treatment Guidelines for Detainees with Gender Identity Disorder by specifying that hormone replacement therapy and other gender-affirming medical interventions are medically necessary and should be made available to all imprisoned people who want them.
“My case is just the tip of the iceberg, as there are others who are detained much longer,” Asanuma said. “I think this experience gave me a good reason to speak up even more for the rights of suspects going forward,” he added.
Teppei Kasai is a program officer for Japan at Human Rights Watch.
India
India’s ‘pink economy’ could bolster economic growth
LGBTQ purchasing power in country estimated to be $168 billion

The rollback of the U.S. Agency for International Development under the Trump-Vance administration represents a global setback for LGBTQ rights. A report from the Observer Research Foundation, a leading Indian think tank that advises the government on policy, however, highlights a unique opportunity for the country to rely less on overseas funding to promote LGBTQ inclusion and integrate the “pink economy” into its broader economic growth strategy, fostering a more inclusive and self-reliant framework.
The “pink economy,” defined as the purchasing power of the queer community, is valued globally at approximately $3.7 trillion. In India, this market is estimated at $168 billion, but remains largely untapped due to persistent stigma that obstructs economic inclusion for LGBTQ people.
The ORF report notes that, as a result, India’s LGBTQ community has relied heavily on international aid and funding, with Western narratives often shaping perceptions of queer identities.
Despite India’s efforts to advance LGBTQ rights — through recognizing a “third gender” in the 2011 Census, the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision to decriminalize consensual same-sex sexual relations by striking down Section 377, and the passage of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act in 2019 — these measures have done little to meaningfully to elevate the social and economic status of the LGBTQ community.
India’s queer community constitutes roughly 18 percent of the global queer population. A 2025 study reveals it receives only 1 percent of global LGBTQ funding, despite heavy reliance on international donors.
The Against All Odds — Advancing Equity for India’s LGBTQIA+ Communities report reveals that, within India, only one of the nation’s top 50 donors explicitly funds queer causes, underscoring a significant gap in domestic philanthropy for the LGBTQIA+ community.
India’s Social Justice and Empowerment Ministry for the 2025-2026 fiscal year allocated $1.07 billion to support education, skilling, healthcare, and rehabilitation for marginalized groups. The ORF report, however, emphasizes this funding falls significantly short for the estimated 140 million-strong queer community, as it narrowly focuses on trans people, thereby limiting its impact on the broader LGBTQ community.
A 2014 World Bank report, the Economic Cost of Homophobia and The Exclusion of LGBT People: A Case Study of India, found that excluding the LGBTQ community from economic participation results in a GDP loss of between .1 and 1.7 percent, translating to an annual economic impact of $1.9 billion to $30.8 billion.
The ORF report underscores that social stigma restricts access to education and hinders opportunities for meaningful employment.
A 2024 report, Fundamental Rights of Work Inclusion for LGBTQ in India, reveals that fewer than 6 percent of trans people are part of the formal workforce, with their presence in the public sector being nearly negligible. It further notes that, for daily survival, many trans people are forced into hostile environments or resort to street begging.
Thailand, with a marriage equality law that took effect in January, is widely recognized for its relative tolerance toward the LGBTQ community, fostering a vibrant queer culture in cities like Bangkok. The country actively promotes itself as a gay-friendly tourism destination, with businesses capitalizing on the “pink economy” through events, nightlife, and tailored travel services. A 2017 report highlighted Thailand as a leading hub for gay-friendly holidays, significantly bolstering its pink economy.
China stands out as a major player in the “pink economy,” valued at an estimated $300 billion annually in 2017, the largest in Asia, fueled by at least 70 million people. Despite government restrictions on queer content, businesses like Blued, a gay social networking app with 54 million users, and Taobao and other e-commerce platforms have tapped into the “pink market,” offering services such as same-sex wedding packages abroad.
Japan has made gradual strides in LGBTQ inclusion with Goldman Sachs, Panasonic, Rakuten and other companies implementing inclusive policies, such as same-sex partner benefits, since 2015. The Japan Business Federation in 2017 issued guidelines to promote LGBTQ-inclusive employment. Tokyo’s rising status as an LGBTQ-friendly city bolsters tourism and consumer markets tied to the “pink economy.” Japan’s tech and tourism sectors remain robust, despite the country’s modest economic growth, with “pink economy” initiatives driving urban economic vitality.
Anish Gawande, the first openly gay national spokesperson for India’s Nationalist Congress Party, told the Washington Blade that excluding the LGBTQ community carries a tangible financial cost. He emphasized India must soon recognize that marginalizing this group not only triggers a brain drain of top talent but also bars hundreds of thousands of highly capable individuals from driving the nation’s economic progress.
“I am a firm believer in a politics of care. If we only want LGBTQ+ inclusion for the sake of economic prosperity, there will never be true inclusion,” said Gawande. “What we must understand is that an embracing of diversity — across caste, class, religion, region, gender, and sexuality — is fundamental to ensuring that we build communities that listen to and learn from each other. By embracing diversity, which has been at the very heart of what it means to be Indian, we do not just prosper economically — but also build more resilient, more equal, and more harmonious societies.”
Kalki Subramaniam, a prominent LGBTQ activist and artist, told the Blade the issue transcends mere economic gain, emphasizing the vibrant spirit and unrecognized potential of LGBTQ people across India.
“We are here, we exist, and our contributions are invaluable. But the government is yet to recognize and fully tap it,” said Subramaniam. “If they are not listening, they will lose out, not just on money, but on the richness we bring to the fabric of India. This is not just an economic report, it is a heartbeat of a community yearning to be seen, to be accepted, and to be allowed to shine for the prosperity of our shared home.”