World
Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Europe and Asia
Thai lawmakers approve marriage equality bill
PORTUGAL
The Portuguese Parliament passed the final draft of a bill this past week, which was first introduced last May by the Bloco de Esquerda, the populist democratic socialist political party, that outlaws “any practice aimed at the forced conversion of sexual orientation, identity or gender expression.”
Joined in a coalition with the Livre and PAN parties, the new law incorporates into the country’s penal code that “whoever subjects another person to this type of treatment, including the performance or promotion of medical-surgical procedures, practices with pharmacological, psychotherapeutic or other psychological or behavioral resources, will be punished with a prison sentence of up to three years or a fine.”
During the parliamentary debate in the Constitutional Affairs, Rights, Freedoms and Guarantees, the College of Physicians Committee issued a statement in which it criticized this type of therapy for “not having proven its effectiveness nor respecting the ethical and deontological standards of medical practice.” The organization highlighted that “diversity in sexual orientation and gender identity represents normal expressions, which cannot be considered diseases.”
The law now heads to President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa for his signature.
Passage of the law by Parliament brings Portugal into alignment with other European Union nations. Malta was the first European country to ban the practice followed by Germany, Greece, Albania, France and Belgium.
SPAIN
The Assembly of Madrid, the unicameral autonomous legislature which governs the region around Spain’s capital city, voted this past week to rollback protections for transgender people. The measure was passed by the conservative People’s Party.
The measure also contained a proviso that guidelines preventing harassment of LGBTQ students in schools is eliminated, all content aimed at showing the LGBTQ community and the training of teachers in this matter are removed from the study plans.
The bill amended a regional trans rights law and an LGBTQ rights law, both of which were passed in 2016. The decision makes Madrid the first Spanish region to roll back such legislation. The anti-trans bill stripped the previous law of its fundamental pillar: The concept of “gender self-determination” or “freely expressed gender identification.”
The PP’s new law replaced the terms “trans people” and “gender identity” with “transsexuals” and “transsexuality,” terms which activists say are demeaning.
The Standard, a British news outlet, reported the move by the PP party sparked outcry from the opposition in Madrid and LGBTQ activists.
Carla Antonelli, an assembly member for the left-wing Mas Madrid party who is trans, wore red gloves symbolizing bloodied hands during the raucous debate preceding the vote. She called the bill an “abomination” and compared it to the actions of Nazi SS doctor Josef Mengele, who “also spoke of science to exterminate Jews and LGTBQ people.”
“When you press that button to vote for this infamy … you will all have blood on your hands,” Antonelli said adding: “This is terrorism towards trans people. You won’t be able to wash your dirty conscience because we will remind you of it every day.”
The Standard also noted that in December 2022, Spain passed a nationwide bill allowing trans people aged 14 and over to change their legal gender without the need for psychological or other medical evaluation, though those aged 14-16 would still need parental or guardians’ agreement.
Fourteen other Spanish regions out of the country’s 17 have laws for the protection of trans rights, LGBTQ rights, or both, on the books.
GREECE
The spokesperson for Greece’s center-right government announced Dec. 21 that legislation legalizing same-sex marriage will be brought to the Hellenic Parliament before its current term expires in 2027.
Pavlos Marinakis noted this action would take place despite facing staunch opposition from the country’s influential Orthodox Church, which the church’s governing Holy Synod had submitted late on Dec. 20, expressing strong opposition to legalizing same-sex marriage.
The Greek City Times reported that the church’s stance drew significant attention from the Greek news media, sparking a lively debate within the country. Opinion polls indicate that Greeks are evenly divided on the issue of same-sex marriage but generally oppose granting full parental rights to gay couples.
“The position of the Church of Greece remains that children have an innate need and therefore a right to grow up with a male father and a female mother. No amount of social modernization and no amount of political correctness can bypass (this),” the church document said.
“Children are not companion pets for those who wish to feel like a guardian, and are not ‘accessories’ to formalize or make same-sex cohabitation socially acceptable,” it added.
The Associated Press noted that Greece’s left-wing opposition leader, Stefanos Kasselakis, married his male partner in New York in October, several weeks after winning a party leadership election.
Greece legalized same-sex civil partnerships in 2015.
HUNGARY
In a press conference on Dec. 21, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán accused the European Commission of blackmailing his country over its anti-LGBTQ laws and other rule-of-law concerns.
“In our view, Hungary fulfils all the qualities of the rule of law, and when the European Commission has specific needs, we implement everything from them, and we are also cooperative,” Orbán told reporters. “You cannot blame me for doing everything I can to promote Hungary’s interests in such a blackmailed situation.”
Orbán has been embroiled in a long-standing dispute with the governing body of the EU, the European Commission, which has frozen billions of funds intended for Hungary over concerns about human rights and the rule of law in the country.
The government of the conservative ruling party of the prime minister has been feuding with the EU since passage of Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ education law in June 2021.
Orbán, who has publicly proclaimed that he is a “defender of traditional family Catholic values,” has been criticised by international human rights groups as discriminating against LGBTQ+ people with this law which European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called a “disgrace.”
The European Commission, the ruling body of the EU, referred Hungary to the EU Court of Justice over the anti-LGBT law in mid-2022. The commission has said it considers that the law violates the EU’s internal market rules, the fundamental rights of individuals and EU values.
UNITED KINGDOM
A Manchester Crown jury found a pair of teenagers guilty in the murder of Brianna Ghey, a 16 year old trans girl and TikTok creator who was brutally stabbed to death in a park in Culcheth, Warrington, in February 2023.
The jury unanimously ruled the teens, known only as Girl X and Boy Y, guilty after deliberating for over four hours. The judge said she would have to impose a life sentence, with the official sentencing to take place next year.
Ghey, who lived in Birchwood, Cheshire, and was a junior at Birchwood Community High School had been bullied for her trans identity according to comments left on social media posts by friends and fellow students.
Her friends alleged she had been bullied and gang beaten at Birchwood Community High School for several years over the “simple reason of being trans.”
The gruesome details came out during the trial in Manchester, where the jury heard testimony that the pair, a male and a female, both 16 had a “thirst for killing” and were fascinated by torture.
PinkNewsUK reported a “murder plan” was later discovered in the female’s bedroom, and investigators discovered that they had put together a “kill list” made up of five children before they settled on making Ghey their first target. The jury also heard that male had referred to Ghey as “it” rather than “she,” which he said was a “joke” between himself and his female accomplice.
The Judge, Amanda Louise Yip, noted that she would have to impose a life sentence for both defendants. She explained that she will now have to decide what the “minimum amount of time you will be required to serve before you might be considered for release” should be.
Yip, after the jury’s verdict was delivered, announced there was a public interest in lifting restrictions on reporting the teenagers’ names, which because of their ages had not been disclosed. However she said the welfare of the defendants could be put at risk if supports were not put in place, BBC News reported.
The judge acknowledged that naming Ghey’s murderers would “cause distress to their families,” and she noted that they had already faced threats and harassment due to their children’s actions.
“I believe the appropriate balance can be achieved by directing that the order may be lifted but placing a [delay] upon it until the date of sentencing,” she said.
The Tory government’s Department for Education released a set of much-feared school policies and guidance concerning transgender students on Dec. 18. LGBTQ advocacy groups responded, describing the government’s draft guidance for trans schoolchildren proposals as “chilling” and “actively dangerous.”
PinkNewsUK reported the long-delayed guidance on how to support trans and non-binary pupils at school lays out steps to approach a range of issues, from social transition, to changing names and pronouns, to access to single-sex spaces.
The non-statutory guidance explicitly states that primary school-aged children “should not have different pronouns to their sex-based pronouns used about them,” and that if a child wishes to socially transition, parents should be engaged.
The plan further outlined policies that would forcibly out trans youth to their parents, ban pronouns for all primary school trans youth, prevent trans youth from using restrooms that align with their gender identity and could even lead to forced haircuts and clothing choices.
Journalist Erin Reed noted the policies even allow schools to enforce uniform policies based on a student’s assigned sex at birth, explicitly stating that trans students should follow the “hairstyle rules” of their assigned sex at birth. This would lead to trans girls being forced, for instance, to cut their hair short. You can see the policies here:
Social transition bans are, of course, seen and being promoted in other countries as well. New Zealand’s “Resist Gender Education” calls for the government to ban all social transition in schools, “even with parental consent.” In a statement to PinkNewsUK, Mermaids, a group that advocates for trans youth, added that the government’s guidance is “out-of-touch” and “absurd”.
“It is difficult to understand how aspects of this draft guidance, including automatically excluding trans pupils from facilities, sport bans or allowing students to be misgendered are compatible with existing equalities law,” the charity said.
“The overwhelming majority of teachers and parents believe trans pupils should be safe at school and will disregard these discriminatory guidelines, which will be non-compulsory.”
NEW ZEALAND
A new government policy will yank millions of dollars of public funding from New Zealand sports organizations as the government of newly elected Prime Minister Christopher Luxon sets out its agenda to “ensure publicly funded sporting bodies support fair competition that is not compromised by rules relating to gender.”
Andy Foster, a spokesperson for the populist and nationalist political New Zealand First party says it is “about fairness and safety in sport for women,” the NZ Herald reported.
Trans athlete and two-time national champion mountain biker Kate Weatherly told the Herald she fears it will lead to athletes being forced into men’s competitions or sidelined completely. Given the minimal number of trans women competing in amateur sports, Weatherly fears it could lead to their exclusion from the grassroots arena, she added.
Sport and Recreation Minister Chris Bishop was uncomfortable discussing the coalition agreement. “New Zealand First are very keen to make sure we have an inclusive environment and atmosphere for everybody — and that rules relating to gender don’t get in the way of that,” Bishop told the Herald.
“It is a tricky one, a thorny issue. There’s strong views on both sides of the debate. I’ll work through that with the relevant sporting bodies. Ultimately it’s got to go over to sporting bodies to make sure that we have fair competition.”
THAILAND
On Dec. 21, the Thai House of Representatives passed four draft bills regarding legalizing same-sex marriages in this Southeast Asia nation which has one of the more open cultures in that part of the world in acceptance of LGBTQ people.
Amnesty International Thailand Researcher Chanatip Tatiyakaroonwong noted in a statement:
“By potentially becoming the third place in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage, Thailand has the opportunity to set a bold example for LGBTI people’s rights in this region. These bills and the debates in Parliament over them represent a moment of hope for LGBTI people’s rights in Asia, even though there is still much to be done for their full protection.
The final version of this draft legislation must not water down calls for the full spectrum of the right to family life, including access to adoption and inheritance for LGBTI couples, as well as the legal recognition of same-sex couples as ‘spouses’ on an equal footing with different-sex couples.
As LGBTI activists have systematically demonstrated, efforts to broaden rights for LGBTI people don’t go nearly far enough to ensure equal rights guaranteed under international law. These bills set Thailand on a new path that could right those wrongs.
If legislation passes on first reading, Thailand’s Parliament should build on the momentum and prioritize the immediate adoption of this law, taking note of the celebratory reaction as a sign that the country is hungry for equality. Lawmakers in Parliament should continue to demonstrate to Thailand’s LGBTI community that they are listening and valuing their voices, wishes and perspectives.
Guaranteeing full marriage equality in law not only sends a message to the rest of the region but to the rest of the world, at a time when countries all over the globe are changing outdated laws and building more inclusive societies.”
Reuters reported that Deputy Prime Minister Somsak Thepsuthin told Parliament, referring to the government’s draft bill.
“In principle, this draft law is for the amendment of some provisions in the civic codes to open the way for lovers, regardless of their gender, to engage and get married. This will provide rights, responsibilities and family status as equal to the marriage between a man and a woman presently in all aspects,” he said.
Somsak said a government survey conducted between Oct. 31-Nov. 14 showed 96.6 percent public support for the draft bill.
Additional reporting from Esquerda News Lisbon, The Standard UK, Greek City Times, The Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, 24.HU News, PinkNewsUK, The BBC, Erin Reed, The New Zealand Herald and Reuters.
Japan
Japanese Supreme Court to consider marriage equality
Japan only G7 country that does not legally recognize same-sex couples
The Japanese Supreme Court on Wednesday said it will consider six marriage equality lawsuits.
NHK, the country’s public broadcaster, noted all 15 of the court’s justices will consider the case.
Japan is the only G7 country that does not legally recognize same-sex couples, despite several court rulings in recent years that found the denial of marriage benefits to gays and lesbians unconstitutional.
Tokyo High Court Judge Ayumi Higashi last November upheld Japan’s legal definition of a family as a man and a woman and their children.
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, who became the country’s first female head of government last October, opposes marriage rights for same-sex couples. She has also reiterated the constitution’s assertion that the family is an institution based around “the equal rights of husband and wife.”
Same-sex couples can legally marry in Taiwan, Nepal, and Thailand.
NHK reported the Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling in early 2027.
Botswana
Lorato ke Lorato: marriage equality, democracy, and the unfinished work of justice in Botswana
High Court considering marriage equality case
As Botswana prepares for the resumption of a landmark marriage equality case before the High Court on July 14–15, the country finds itself at a critical constitutional crossroads.
At first glance, the matter may appear to be about whether two women, Bonolo Selelelo and Tsholofelo Kumile, can have their love legally recognized. At its core however, this case is about something far more profound: the dismantling of patriarchy, the decolonization of law, and the integrity of Botswana’s constitutional democracy.
Beyond marriage: a question of power
Marriage, as a legal institution, has never been neutral. It has historically functioned as a mechanism for regulating women’s bodies, sexuality, and social roles within a patriarchal order. To deny LBQ (lesbian, bisexual, and queer) women access to marriage is not merely to exclude them from a legal benefit, it is to reinforce a hierarchy of relationships, where heterosexual unions are deemed legitimate and all others invisible. This case therefore challenges the very foundations of who gets to love, who gets to belong, and who gets to be protected under the law.
As feminist scholars have long argued, patriarchy is sustained through institutions that appear ordinary but are deeply political. The law is one such institution. And it is precisely here that this case intervenes: by asking whether Botswana’s legal system will continue to uphold exclusion, or evolve to reflect the constitutional promise of equality.
A constitutional journey: Botswana’s courts and human dignity
This is not the first time Botswana’s courts have been called upon to affirm the dignity of LGBTQI+ persons. Over the past decade, the judiciary has built a progressive body of jurisprudence grounded in equality, nondiscrimination, and human dignity.
In Attorney General v. Rammoge and Others (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. CACGB 128-14, 2016), the Court of Appeal upheld the right of LEGABIBO to register as an organization. The court affirmed that:
“The refusal to register the appellant society was not only unlawful, but a violation of the respondents’ fundamental rights to freedom of association.”
This was followed by the ND v. Attorney General of Botswana (MAHGB-000449-15, 2017) case, where the High Court recognized the right of a transgender man to change his gender marker. The court held:
“Gender identity is an integral part of a person’s identity … and any interference with that identity is a violation of dignity.”
In Letsweletse Motshidiemang v. Attorney General (MAHGB-000591-16, 2019), the High Court decriminalized same-sex activity, declaring sections of the Penal Code unconstitutional. Justice Leburu powerfully stated:
“Human dignity is harmed when minority groups are marginalized.”
This decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Attorney General v. Motshidiemang (CACGB-157-19, 2021), where the court emphasized:
“The Constitution is a dynamic instrument … it must be interpreted in a manner that gives effect to the values of dignity, liberty, and equality.”
These cases collectively establish a clear principle: the Constitution of Botswana protects all persons, not just the majority.
The marriage equality case now asks a logical next question: If LGBTQI+ persons are entitled to dignity, identity, and freedom from criminalization, why are their relationships still denied recognition?
Decolonizing the law: What is truly ‘UnAfrican’?
Opponents of marriage equality often argue that homosexuality is “unAfrican.” This claim, while politically powerful, is historically inaccurate. Same-sex relationships and diverse gender identities have existed across African societies long before colonial rule. What is foreign, however, are the laws that criminalize these identities.
Botswana’s anti-sodomy laws were inherited from British colonial legal systems, not from indigenous Tswana culture. As scholars of African history have demonstrated, colonial administrations imposed rigid Victorian moral codes that erased and suppressed existing sexual diversity. To claim that homosexuality is unAfrican, while defending colonial-era laws, is therefore a contradiction.
A truly decolonial approach to the law requires us to ask: Whose morality are we upholding? And whose history are we erasing?
Marriage equality, in this sense, is not a Western imposition: it is part of a broader project of reclaiming African dignity, plurality, and humanity.
Democracy on trial: the question of separation of powers
This case also raises important questions about the health of Botswana’s democracy.
Following the 2021 Court of Appeal decision affirming the decriminalization of same-sex relations, Botswana witnessed public demonstrations, including marches led by groups such as the Evangelical Fellowship of Botswana (EFB), opposing the judgment and calling for the retention of discriminatory laws.
While public participation is a cornerstone of democracy, these events raise deeper concerns about the separation of powers. Courts are constitutionally mandated to interpret the law and protect fundamental rights, even when such decisions are unpopular. When judicial decisions grounded in constitutional principles are publicly resisted on moral or religious grounds, it risks undermining the authority of the courts and the rule of law itself.
Democracy is not simply about majority opinion: it is about the protection of minority rights within a constitutional framework.
Botswana is not a theocracy
It is also important to clarify a recurring misconception: Botswana is not a Christian nation.
Botswana is a secular constitutional democracy and more accurately, a pluralistic society that recognizes and respects diversity of belief, culture, and identity. The Constitution does not elevate one religion above others, nor does it permit religious doctrine to dictate legal rights. The law must serve all citizens equally, regardless of faith.
To frame marriage equality as a threat to Christianity is therefore misplaced. The question before the courts is not theological, but constitutional: Does the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage violate the rights to equality and nondiscrimination?
Love, equality, and the future of justice
At its heart, this case is about love, but it is also about power, history, and justice. It asks whether Botswana is prepared to move beyond colonial legal frameworks and patriarchal norms, and to embrace a future grounded in equality, dignity, and inclusion.
It asks whether the Constitution will continue to be interpreted as a living document, one that evolves with society, or remain constrained by outdated moral assumptions. Ultimately, it asks whether Botswana’s democracy can hold true to its founding promise: that all persons are equal before the law.
As the High Court prepares to hear this case in July 2026, the nation has an opportunity to affirm not only the rights of two individuals, but the broader principle that love, in all its diversity, deserves recognition, and protection.
Lorato ke lorato.
Love is love.
Justice, if it is to mean anything at all, must make space for it.
Nozizwe is the CEO of LEGABIBO (Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana)
India
Menaka Guruswamy celebrated as India’s first openly LGBTQ MP
Constitutional lawyer elected to Rajya Sabha on March 9
India’s LGBTQ community has found renewed hope in the election of Menaka Guruswamy, a lawyer who has argued before the Supreme Court, as the country’s first openly LGBTQ MP.
Guruswamy was declared elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of Parliament, on March 9, representing West Bengal. The All India Trinamool Congress, the regional party that governs the state, nominated her.
Guruswamy is a constitutional lawyer who studied at Oxford University, Harvard Law School, and the National Law School of India University. She has argued several significant cases before the Supreme Court and is widely known for her work on constitutional law, civil liberties, and LGBTQ rights.
Guruswamy was part of the legal team that successfully challenged Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, a colonial-era law that criminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations, which the Supreme Court struck down in 2018. She has also written and spoken extensively on issues of democracy, rights and institutional accountability.
Ankit Bhupatani, a global diversity, equity and inclusion leader and LGBTQ activist, welcomed Guruswamy’s election.
“This is significant not because Parliament needed a queer person, but because a queer person needed Parliament,” Bhupatani told the Washington Blade.
India has seen LGBTQ representation in elected office at the state and local levels, though it has remained limited.
In 1998, Shabnam Mausi was elected to the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly from the Sohagpur constituency, becoming one of the first openly transgender people to hold public office in India. Mausi’s election marked a rare moment of visibility for trans people in the country’s political system, where representation has historically been sparse. Since then, a small number of openly trans candidates have contested and, in some cases, won local and state elections, but no openly LGBTQ person had been elected to Parliament before Guruswamy.
Guruswamy and her partner, Arundhati Katju, who is also a lawyer, were part of the legal team that played a central role in the Section 377 decision.
Representing one of the plaintiffs, the two lawyers helped frame the case around constitutional guarantees of equality, dignity, and privacy. The Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India ruling marked a watershed moment for LGBTQ rights in India.
“For too long, we have fought our battles only in courtrooms and on streets. Now, there is a seat at the table where laws are written,” said Bhupatani. “Whether that seat produces change depends entirely on how it is used. Representation without substance is decoration. But as a beginning, yes. This matters.”
Guruswamy later represented the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court’s 2023 marriage equality case, Supriyo v. Union of India, which a 5-judge panel heard in the spring of 2023.
Along with other lawyers representing same-sex couples, she advanced arguments rooted in constitutional guarantees of equality, dignity, and personal liberty. The Supreme Court in a 3-2 decision on Oct. 17, 2023, declined to recognize same-sex marriage — holding that such a change falls within Parliament’s domain — but did acknowledge LGBTQ people face discrimination. The Blade previously reported the ruling underscored the court’s view that it could interpret the law, but could not create a new legal framework for marriage rights.
Bhupatani said Guruswamy’s election should not be seen as an immediate shift toward legislative action on LGBTQ rights, cautioning that such expectations may not align with political realities. He said her presence in Parliament could help sustain the issue in a way it has not been before, even as broader legal change is likely to take time.
“What she can do is keep the question alive inside Parliament in a way that it hasn’t been before,” Bhupatani said. “Legislative change in India on social questions usually takes longer than advocates want and shorter than skeptics predict. The 377 decriminalization seemed impossible until it wasn’t. Partnership rights will follow the same pattern eventually.”
Bhupatani added that while Guruswamy’s election may influence the pace of change, it does not, on its own, constitute a broader political movement.
“One person in Parliament, however extraordinary, is not a movement. She is an opening,” he said. “The 2023 ruling created a responsibility. Guruswamy’s election creates an opportunity to fulfill it from inside. Whether opportunity becomes outcome is entirely a question of human will.”
Guruswamy has served as a visiting faculty member at leading American institutions that include Yale Law School, Columbia Law School, and New York University School of Law. She has also worked with international organizations, advising the U.N. Development Fund for Women in New York and the U.N. Children’s Fund in both New York and South Sudan.
According to her professional profile, Guruswamy has been involved in a range of significant cases before the Indian Supreme Court that include matters related to bureaucratic reform and accountability.
One case is connected to the AgustaWestland helicopter deal, an investigation into alleged bribery in a multimillion-dollar defense procurement contract; litigation arising from the Salwa Judum case, in which the court examined the state-backed use of civilian militias in counterinsurgency operations in central India; and cases involving the implementation of the Right to Education Act, a law guaranteeing free and compulsory education for children between the ages of six and 14.
More recently, Guruswamy represented the All India Trinamool Congress in legal proceedings challenging searches conducted by India’s Enforcement Directorate, a federal agency responsible for investigating financial crimes, including money laundering and violations of foreign exchange laws. The searches were carried out at the offices of the Indian Political Action Committee, or I-PAC, a political consulting firm that provides data-driven campaign strategy and election management services to political parties. The case raised questions about the scope of investigative powers and the use of federal agencies in politically sensitive matters.
Guruswamy’s engagement with LGBTQ rights has extended beyond courtroom advocacy into public constitutional discourse.
On July 11, 2018, during hearings in the Section 377 case, she argued the criminalization law could not be justified on the basis of “social morality,” describing it as subjective and incompatible with constitutional guarantees, and framing the case as one fundamentally about “our humanity.” The Thomas Jefferson Foundation Medal in Law at the University of Virginia in February 2023 recognized Guruswamy and Katju for their work on LGBTQ rights.
Guruswamy has not responded to the Blade’s multiple requests for comment about her election.
Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story
Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents
Japanese Supreme Court to consider marriage equality
The outrage economy is not the LGBTQ community
Calendar: March 27-April 2
Trans Day of Visibility events planned
Virginia General Assembly’s 2026 legislative session ends
Markwayne Mullin confirmed as next DHS secretary
Gay man murdered in Va.
