Connect with us

World

Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Europe and Asia

Lesbian Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabić has stepped down

Published

on

(Los Angeles Blade graphic)

LITHUANIA

Lithuanian Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonyte meeting with government officials. (Photo courtesy of Šimonyte’s office)

A group of same-sex couples is taking the Lithuanian government to the European Court of Human Rights, seeking access to civil unions, marriage and parental rights. 

The couples involved in the suit are seeking registration of civil partnerships and recognition of same-sex marriages contracted in foreign countries. In a separate case, a same-sex couple is seeking equal parenting rights for their child. The petitioners will also be asking the Lithuanian Constitutional Court to clarify the definition of marriage in the constitution.

Lithuania does not recognize any form of same-sex relationship. A bill to legalize civil unions was proposed by the governing coalition and is one vote from passing through Parliament, but has been put on hold amid fears that it doesn’t have enough support to pass.

“The year-long litigation marathon clearly shows the reasons why trust in courts is so low in Lithuania. International law does not work in Lithuania,” Martynas Norbutas, one of the petitioners, said at a press conference.

The European Court of Human Rights is a supranational court for all members of the Council of Europe, which tries cases involving the European Convention on Human Rights. While the court has found that the convention does not require states to allow same-sex marriage, it has in the past found that same-sex couples must be grants some alternative status that is equivalent to marriage. However, it is up to individual states to implement the court’s rulings, as it has no enforcement mechanism.

Of the Council of Europe’s 46 members, 21 allow same-sex marriage, 10 allow same-sex civil unions and 15 currently have no recognition of same-sex unions.

In February, Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė said she was disappointed that members of her coalition had gone back on their word by failing to support the civil union law.

“I know very well that I cannot convince some of my colleagues despite the fact that the absolute majority of our factions vote for that law,” Šimonytė said on the local news program Laisvės TV.

It isn’t the first time Lithuania’s unruly coalition has failed to pass an LGBTQ rights law. Last year, the government tried to repeal an old “LGBT propaganda” law that the European Court ruled violated the convention’s right to freedom of expression, but the bill was voted down in parliament. A separate bill that would have seen Lithuania join the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention on Domestic Violence was also voted down after anti-LGBTQ activists began a campaign linking the convention to “gender ideology.”

Parties on both sides of the issue are attempting to shore up support ahead of parliamentary elections expected in October.

In neighboring Poland, the newly elected government says it is still planning to introduce same-sex civil unions, although it will miss its self-imposed deadline of doing so within its first 100 days. Equalities Minister Katarzyna Kotula told OKO.press that the government is still working with its coalition partners to come to agreement on what civil unions will entail, with the government preferring that same-sex couples get all the rights that come with marriage, including adoption and parenting rights.

GEORGIA

Mamuka Mdinaradze, executive secretary of the governing Georgian Dream party, speaking with reporters. (1TV-GPB YouTube screenshot)

The government of the former Soviet republic of Georgia has announced plans to introduce a series of laws and constitutional amendments to limit so-called “LGBT propaganda,” ban gender change and ban adoption by LGBTQ people.

Georgia’s Parliament amended the constitution in 2017 to ban same-sex marriage. This proposal would add a new special constitutional law for the protection of family values and minors.

Under the new constitutional law, the state would be forbidden from recognizing any relationship other than heterosexual relationships, restrict adoption to married heterosexual couples and heterosexual individuals, ban any medical treatment to change a person’s gender and require that the government only recognize gender based on a person’s genetic information and ban any expression or organization promoting same-sex relationships or gender change.

Mamuka Mdinaradze, the executive secretary of the governing Georgian Dream party, says the goal of the constitutional amendments is to “protect society from pseudo-liberal ideology and its inevitable harmful consequences.”

Mdinaradze says the reforms will allow the government to block attempts by courts or international bodies to force the government to recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions. 

While the Georgian government has been pursuing an alignment with the West and membership in the European Union, its government has recently taken many regressive steps on human rights and rule of law.

Last year, it introduced a “foreign agents” law that would have cracked down on media and non-governmental organizations that are critical of the government. The government backed down after massive protests.

But the conservative Georgian society appears unlikely to mobilize in massive numbers to oppose this bill, even if it does attack basic human rights.

However, as the proposed reforms would conflict with the European Union’s standards for free expression and human rights, the proposal may force Georgians to decide between repressing LGBTQ rights and its goal of EU membership.

“As an EU candidate country, Georgia is expected to align its laws with EU legislation,” the EU delegation in Georgia told German newspaper DW. “The candidate country must have achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing respect for human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.”

The Georgian Dream party seems to have introduced the bill to shore up support ahead of elections scheduled for October.

SERBIA

Former Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabić (AFP YouTube screenshot)

Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabić has stepped down after seven years in power, in a reshuffle of President Alexander Vučić’s government. Brnabić will take on the role of speaker of Parliament, while Vučić has named his ally Miloš Vučević as her successor.

Brnabić became the first woman and the first lesbian to hold the office of prime minister of Serbia, or to be a leader of any Eastern European country, in 2017. She is also the longest-serving person to have held the office.

She is still the most prominent LGBTQ person in the conservative, Eastern Orthodox country. 

During her time in office, her status as a lesbian drew very little notice or criticism from Serbian society. She was the first leader of a Balkan country to attend a Pride march when she attended Belgrade Pride in 2017. She was frequently seen with her partner Milica Đurđić, who gave birth to their son in 2019.

However, despite her prominent title, it has been said that Brnabić wielded little actual power in the Serbian government, which is dominated by Vučić.

Brnabić has said that she didn’t want to be seen as the “gay prime minister” and that she prioritized policy goals other than LGBTQ rights in office. In turn, Serbia made little progress on expanding LGBTQ rights during her term.

The government introduced a civil unions bill in 2020 but shelved it months later amid backlash from legislators and a veto threat by Vučić. Beyond that, Brnabić’s government introduced a ban on discrimination against intersex people and removed regulations that barred LGBTQ people from accessing IVF or donating sperm. 

During her time in office, Freedom House downgraded its classification of Serbia from “Free” to “Partly Free” due to Vučić’s increasingly authoritarian use of power and crackdowns on local media.

The government shuffle comes after December elections that were widely disputed as being rigged to favor the government. Last year, Serbia was rocked by months of nationwide protests against the government in the wake of rising gun violence, which a new opposition bloc had hoped would lead to gains in Parliament. Instead, the government won a majority.

JAPAN

Japan’s Supreme Court’s main courtroom. (Photo courtesy of the Japanese government)

The legal battle to achieve same-sex marriage in Japan reached a new milestone, as the couples involved in a court case in Sapporo announced plans to appeal their loss to the Supreme Court, and in a separate case, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples must get access to a crime victims benefit on an equal basis with married couples.

Same-sex couples have been waging a multi-front fight for same-sex marriage through the courts in Japan, given the national government’s long-standing opposition to addressing LGBTQ rights.

In March, the Sapporo High Court delivered the first appellate-level ruling on same-sex marriage, finding that the government’s refusal to allow same-sex marriage created a “state of unconstitutionality” because it discriminated against same-sex couples, but it otherwise ordered no compensation or remedy for the affected couples.

The couples have now announced they plan to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

One of the plaintiffs, Eri Nakaya, said at a press conference that the legal fight was essential for queer Japanese couples.

“If we back out now, legal recognition will not be achieved in the foreseeable future. I hope the Supreme Court will also declare (the same-sex marriage ban) unconstitutional,” he said.

Before the Supreme Court weighs in, more appellate court decisions are likely. District courts in Nagoya, Fukuoka and two courts in Tokyo have ruled similarly to the Sapporo court, while a district court in Osaka has upheld the ban on same-sex marriage. 

But the Supreme Court may have tipped its hand in a ruling last week, which found that same-sex couples must be granted access to a benefit provided to victims of crime on the same basis as married heterosexual couples. The court came to that conclusion by reasoning that the purpose of the benefit — to help people recover after a crime — does not change depending on the gender of the victim or their partner.

While the ruling is limited to this one specific benefit, it appears likely that the same reasoning that led the court to this conclusion ought to be applicable to the constellation of benefits that are associated with marriage. Commentators have said that the same logic should apply to pensions, health insurance and family leave. 

In the background of these decisions, local governments have increasingly come to recognize same-sex couples and families through legally non-binding “partnership certificates,” which are available or soon to be available in 29 of Japan’s 47 prefectures, as well as more than 400 municipalities.

Companies are also increasingly offering benefits to employees’ same-sex partners, including most recently Disney, which announced that it would provide benefits to same-sex partners of employees at Tokyo Disneyland last week. 

NEW ZEALAND

(NZ Herald screenshot)

In what Auckland police are treating as a hate crime, video captured three people painting over the New Zealand city’s Pride crosswalk with white paint, the latest in a brewing war over the LGBTQ Pride symbols being waged by Christian extremists in the South Pacific country.

A video of the vandals was posted to the TikTok account @aucklandcitynight00. 

Auckland police say that the rainbow crosswalk on Karangahape Road in the heart of the city’s gay nightlife district was vandalized around 4 a.m. local time on March 27. Video shows three people in hooded sweatshirts and balaclavas stopping traffic to pour white paint on the road and cover the crosswalk with long paint rollers. 

The vandals left the scene in a van that had its registration plates removed but police say they were able to trace the distinctively painted van’s owner and executed a search warrant on a property linked to the owner. No arrests have yet been made.

Much of the white paint had washed away due to rain and traffic, but the crosswalk still showed damage late in the day.

It was the second Pride crosswalk to be vandalized last week after a crosswalk in Gisborne, about 300 miles southwest of Auckland, was vandalized Monday morning. 

The rainbow crosswalk on Gisborne’s main street had been painted over by anti-LGBTQ protesters who were upset that the local library was hosting a drag queen story hour. The next day, protesters and counter-protesters turned up at the library’s storytelling event. Then on Wednesday night, three people once again tried to paint over Gisborne’s restored rainbow crosswalk and were arrested by police who were lying in wait.

Three people have been accused of vandalism — two men aged 46 and 36, and a woman aged 45. A fourth suspect fled the scene, and police are still searching for him. 

The Gisborne protesters were affiliated with the extremist Divinity Church, a Christian cult led by Brian Tamaki with around 1,700 members, according to the latest New Zealand Census. Tamaki preaches a far-right political ideology alongside anti-LGBTQ messages.

The threats have already led to drag queen story hours to be cancelled in the cities of Rotorua and Hastings, about 150 and 300 miles south of Auckland respectively. Librarians in both cities said the cancellations were made due to security concerns after the Divinity Church spread threats and misinformation about the events on social media. 

He has said he intends for his church to continue protesting against town councils and libraries that host LGBTQ events and plans to continue vandalizing rainbow crosswalks, although he has denied any involvement in the Auckland crosswalk vandalism.

Tamaki has previously blamed the 2011 Christchurch earthquake on homosexuality.

AUSTRALIA

New South Wales Parliament building. (Photo courtesy of New South Wales Parliament)

Making good on a campaign promise, New South Wales’ Parliament passed a law banning conversion therapy, making it the fourth Australian state or territory to ban the discredited practice that seeks to change people’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

The ban takes effect in one year and imposes a maximum penalty of up to five years imprisonment for any person that delivers conversion therapy that causes significant harm. The law also includes a civil complaints scheme.

New South Wales joins Queensland, Victory and the Australian Capital Territory in banning the practice. The governments of Tasmania and Western Australia have also proposed to ban conversion therapy.

“Conversion therapy proceeds on the basis that people in the LGBTQ+ community are broken, they need fixing,” says New South Wales Attorney General Michael Daley. “But we like them just the way they are.”

Worldwide, conversion therapy has been banned in 13 countries: Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Ecuador, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Malta, New Zealand, Spain, Portugal and Norway. A bill to ban the practice nationwide in Mexico is awaiting a final vote in the nation’s Senate after it passed through the Chamber of Deputies last week

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Africa

Congolese lawmaker introduces anti-homosexuality bill

Constant Mutamba’s measure seen as distraction from country’s problems

Published

on

Congolese MP Constant Mutamba (Photo courtesy of Mutamba's X account)

A member of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s National Assembly who is a leader of the country’s opposition party has introduced a bill that would criminalize LGBTQ people.

Part of the bill that Constant Mutamba, leader of the Dynamic Progressive Revolutionary Opposition platform, has put forth states anyone who “commits a homosexual act (including acts and gestures) will be liable to a 5- or 10-year prison sentence.”

The country in recent years has seen government leaders and civic society target the community with anti-LGBTQ sentiments.

The Superior Council for Audiovisual and Communication, Media Regulatory Authority  last June cautioned the media against showing LGBTQ-specific conversations. Several activists have criticized Mutamba’s bill, saying it seeks to move attention away from governance, service delivery and other pertinent issues in the country.

Sirius Tekasala, a human rights activist, said a person’s sexual orientation does not impact issues of governance.

“The proposed bill does not go in the direction of improving the socio-economic life of the Congolese people,” said Tekasala. “It’s not homosexuals who prevent you from doing your job well or from breathing. This is a violation of human rights.”

Mbuela Mbadu Dieudonné, a social analyst and trade unionist, said the bill is just a way of deviating people from the pertinent issues.

“He should suggest how to get the Congolese people out of this precariousness of life which is growing on a daily basis,” said Dieudonné. “When we don’t know the real problems of the Congolese people, he sets himself up as the great director of scenes to distract the Congolese people.”

Many Congolese, however, seem to support the bill and have applauded Mutamba for drafting it.

This is not the first time that such kind of a bill has been drafted.

An anti-homosexuality bill introduced in 2010 would have sentenced people who engage in consensual same-sex sexual relations to between three and five years in prison. The measure, however, did not become law.

Mutamba’s bill, however, may pass with Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Act in effect. The country’s Constitutional Court earlier this month upheld it. Burundi, Tanzania and other neighboring countries are also considering similar measures.

Many Congolese people view LGBTQ rights as a Western phenomenon that disregards their religious and cultural beliefs. LGBTQ Congolese are among those who have fled the country and sought refuge in the Kakuma refugee camp in Kenya and other places.

Consensual same-sex sexual relations are not criminalized in the Democratic Republic of Congo, but Congolese law does not recognize same-sex marriages.

Continue Reading

World

Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Europe and Asia

German lawmakers on Friday passed a transgender rights bill

Published

on

(Los Angeles Blade graphic)

MONACO

(Photo courtesy of the Principality of Monaco)

Monaco’s top court struck down two lower court rulings that would have required the tiny Mediterranean principality to recognize foreign same-sex marriages, in a ruling that has not yet been published.

The case centered around a binational Monegasque-American same-sex couple who married in Grand Rapids, Mich., in August 2019 while residents in that state. When they returned to Monaco the following year, the government refused to record them in the state register of marriages.

“Although valid, this union cannot be transcribed in the marriage register in view of its manifest contrariety with Monegasque public order characterized by the constitutional principle according to which the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman religion is the state religion,” stated a letter from the Public Prosecutor’s Office in a letter to the Civil Registrar on the matter.

The letter goes on to invite the couple to instead form a cohabitation contract, which has been available to same-sex couples in Monaco as a form of civil union since 2020.

The couple rejected that offer and appealed to the attorney general, who again refused to recognize the marriage, so the couple took their case to court.

In March 2022, the court of first instance ruled in the couple’s favor, citing the presumption in international private law that marriages validly concluded in one country are generally recognized in any country. The court also found that the same-sex marriages are not contrary to the public order simply because Catholicism is the state religion, and that the cohabitation agreements are inadequate to protect the family rights of married couples.

The prosecutor general quickly appealed the decision, but the Court of Appeal once again ruled in September 2023 in the couple’s favor. The court also found that the state’s offer that the couple could protect their rights through a cohabitation agreement to be impractical, as the cohabitation law specifically says that agreements are unavailable to anyone who is already married. 

Still, the government appealed the decision to the Court of Revision, Monaco’s highest court dealing with administrative matters. That court finally ruled that the government is not obliged to record same-sex marriages, striking down the previous two rulings. 

LGBTQ rights have long been a contentious issue in the tiny city-state of approximately 39,000. While there are no local LGBTQ advocacy organizations, the state has been pushed to enhance the legal rights of its queer citizens by its larger European neighbors.

Monaco was one of the last states in Western Europe to offer legal recognition to same-sex couples through the 2020 Cohabitation Agreement Bill, which came about largely because Monaco recognized it was in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, which courts have interpreted as requiring states to give equal recognition to same-sex couples. 

Still, the cohabitation agreement is explicitly unequal to marriage. Couples in cohabitation agreements are not considered families and can even include siblings or other relatives. They don’t enjoy equal treatment in terms of taxation or inheritance, can’t choose a common surname and can’t adopt and cohabitation with a Monegasque citizen doesn’t entitle a partner to residency rights the way marriage does.

Monaco also lacks any anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people, and transgender people are not allowed to change their legal gender. 

ITALY

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni with Argentine President Javier Milei in February during a state visit. (Photo courtesy of Meloni’s office)

During a press briefing Friday at the conference “For a Young Europe: Demographic Transition, Environment, Future,” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni took aim at the practice of surrogacy which is already illegal in Italy saying the practice is “inhuman.” 

The prime minister’s party recently introduced legislation in the Italian Parliament that would further criminalize the act by hiking fines from €600,000 to €1 million ($640,290 to $1,067,150) and increasing jail terms from three months up to two years.

“I continue to believe that surrogacy is an inhuman practice,” Meloni said. “I support the bill that makes it a universal crime,” she added.

Last week Pope Francis issued a papal document, the 20-page Dignitas infinita, which stated that surrogacy “violates” both the dignity of the child and the woman, who “becomes a mere means subservient to the arbitrary gain or desire of others.” The document also declared gender-affirming surgery to be a grave violation of human dignity.

CNN reported that the move to criminalize surrogacy is largely seen as a move against the LGBTQ community. Italy was the last European country to legalize same sex unions, which it did in 2016 but does not allow gay couples to be “married,” in line with the Catholic Church.

Under Meloni’s government, birth certificates were changed to list “mother” and “father” rather than “parent 1” and “parent 2.” In 2023 some communities where her Brothers of Italy leads the government, names of lesbian mothers were removed from birth certificates.

CZECH REPUBLIC

Czech Parliament (Photo courtesy of the Czech Parliament)

The Czech Senate began consideration of bill that would enhance the rights of people in same-sex civil partnerships this week, continuing a tense legislative process that has seen pro-and anti-LGBTQ groups lobbying lawmakers to make changes to the bill.

The civil partnership bill passed through the lower house of parliament in February. It was a compromise after a bill that would have allowed same-sex marriage couldn’t get enough support to pass. 

The bill makes registered partnerships, which have been legal in the Czech Republic since 2005, equivalent to marriage in all matters except adoption. Same-sex couples will have the right to stepchild adoption only — couples will not be allowed to jointly adopt.

Some senators have presented amendments to the bill that would allow same-sex marriage and full joint adoption, but some legislators think this strategy is risky — any amendments would send the bill back to the lower house, where it’s not clear they could pass. 

On the other hand, some senators are pushing amendments that would water down the bill further, by eliminating adoption entirely. 

Leading up to the senate debate, LGBTQ advocates were sanguine about the prospects of getting everything they want.

“Together with the majority of Czech society, we sent a clear message to our legislators: Only the institute of equal marriage will ensure equal legal protection, social security and family stability for all couples and families with children,” wrote Lucia Zachariášová a lawyer who works with the LGBTQ advocacy organization Jsme Fér in an open letter to legislators this week. 

“However, the partnership can at this moment fulfill a promise repeated so much that if it is not a question of marriage, there will be no problem to accept such a solution. It is important to repeat again: it will help especially families with children to have a little more restful sleep,” she writes.

So far, three senate committees have examined the bill, recommending either that the Senate pass the bill as is or simply not debate it. In the Czech system, if the Senate doesn’t address a bill passed by the House, it is sent to the president to be signed into law anyway. The president is expected to sign the bill, as he campaigned for full marriage equality.

One more committee is set to examine the bill next week before it’s scheduled for debate on the senate floor April 17. 

If the Senate rejects a bill, or passes it with an amendment, it returns to the lower house, where deputies can either accept the amendment or reaffirm the bill with the support of an absolute majority or 101 votes. The bill originally passed through the lower Chamber of Deputies with 118 votes in favor.

While Czech LGBTQ people are disappointed by the lack of progress on marriage equality, they’re also anxious to get the bill passed, as it would still offer a great improvement to the legal rights of many same-sex couples and their children.

“The House is not expected to improve the amendment. On the contrary, there is a fear that the situation could worsen or that everything would fall under the table,” Jsme Fér said of the progress on the bill in a post on X. “[Senators] fear a debate that might not be dignified for hundreds of thousands of LGBT people, and after six years of debates in the House of Representatives, everything important has already been said.”

GERMANY

The German Reichstag in Berlin in 2022. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

The German Parliament on Friday voted 374-251 to pass a new law allowing trans people to change their legal gender by a simple administrative procedure, replacing outdated requirements from the 1980s for declarations of support from doctors and other invasive procedures.

The new law also imposes hefty fines of up to €10,000 ($10,658.85) on anyone intentionally disclosing a trans person’s previous name or gender for a harmful purpose. The law allows exceptions in cases where disclosure would be a legal requirement, for example in a court proceeding or a police investigation.

Under the new law, trans people may change their legal gender to male, female or “diverse” — a third-gender option already available under German law. Applicants can also request that no gender details be recorded at all. Trans people will simply file a request, and then appear in person at a registry office three months later to make the change official. 

The new law is open to people over 18. Those between 14 and 17 will need a parent’s permission to file the application, while those under 14 will require parents to file the application on their behalf. 

Applicants are limited to one name and gender change within 12 months. The law also allows the government to suspend applications to change legal gender from male to female or diverse made up to two months before a national emergency is declared.

The law continues to allow operators of women-only spaces, such as gyms or changing rooms, to decide on their own who is allowed to access them. 

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the law was about showing respect to gender-diverse people.

“We show respect to trans, intersex and non-binary people — without taking anything away from others. This is how we continue to drive the modernization of our country. This includes recognizing realities of life and making them possible by law,” Scholz wrote in a statement on X.

The law was part of the governing agreement made by the current governing coalition. The upper house of parliament does not need to vote on the bill. The law will come into effect in November.

Under the 1980 Transsexuals Law, trans people were required to get two expert reports from doctors attesting that the applicant will not be likely to want to return to their previous legal gender. These reports often required trans people to undergo invasive psychological and physical examinations and would add months of delay and average additional costs of up to €2000 (approximately $2,130.)

The Constitutional Court struck down a requirement that trans people have sex reassignment surgery and be sterilized in 2011. The same court required the government to create a non-binary option for intersex people in 2017, which the government did a year later.

Germany’s coalition government, in place since September 2021, has promised to introduce several pro-LGBTQ policies, including creating a hate crime law, amending the Basic Law to ban discrimination based on sexual identity, and automatic parenthood recognition for same-sex parents.

UNITED KINGDOM

(Photo by Rob Wilson via Bigstock)

A government-commissioned review of gender care services for trans youth in England and Wales has sparked an outcry from trans activists who say that the review discounted decades of research showing the value of gender care treatment to reach a conclusion that care should be restricted for youth.

The “Cass Review” was commissioned by the National Health Service England in 2020 to examine gender care services for young people following reports showing a large increase in the number of youth accessing care at the now-closed Gender Identity Development Service. The Review was led by Dr. Hilary Cass, a former president of the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health.

The disputed report concluded that there isn’t good scientific evidence to support most forms of gender care, including puberty blockers, hormone therapy or social transition.

“While a considerable amount of research has been published in this field, systematic evidence reviews demonstrated the poor quality of the published studies, meaning there is not a reliable evidence base upon which to make clinical decisions, or for children and their families to make informed choices,” reads an excerpt of the report’s executive summary.

But trans advocates criticized that conclusion, pointing out that Cass held existing studies of gender care to an impossible standard. Her report discounted any study that wasn’t based on double-blind trials, which they say would not be possible or ethical.

“The Cass Review dismisses a very large number of studies and omits studies from the past two years. Hence, it neglects a vast amount of evidence on the benefits of gender affirming medical treatment for trans youth in its analysis,” writes Dr. Hane Maung of the trans healthcare service GenderGP.

“For many medical interventions, including gender affirming medical treatment for trans youth, randomized controlled trials are unfeasible and unethical, because the consequences of not intervening would be very apparent to the participants and also would be unacceptably harmful,” he says.

The Cass Review urges caution in treatment for trans youth, including a new recommendation that medical consultations be undertaken before youth are allowed to socially transition — a major expansion of the medicalization of gender identity. Some trans activists also noticed that the review suggests increased surveillance of trans care through age 25, suspecting this implies further restricting care into adulthood.

The day the Cass Review was published, NHS England announced it would be launching a review of adult gender care, alleging whistleblower complaints.

The Guardian reports that Cass also advised the government to be cautious with the proposed ban on conversion therapy, which the government has put under review, but which is unlikely to be introduced before an election is held. Cass reportedly urged the minister responsible to ensure that doctors providing gender care are insulated from accusations of conversion practices, claiming that doctors are already afraid to take a more cautious approach to providing treatment.

The Cass Review has already made waves across the UK, with transphobic author JK Rowling claiming that it vindicates her years-long anti-trans campaigning, and claiming she would “never forgive” “Harry Potter” stars Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson for supporting trans rights.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak endorsed the report’s findings.

“We care above all about the wellbeing of children and it’s clear that these things are not neutral acts, whether that’s social transitioning, any kind of medical intervention, we simply do not know the long-term effects of these things,” he says. “And that’s why anyone involved in considering these issues, of course, has to treat people with sensitivity and compassion, but also have to be extremely cautious when it comes to taking any action.”

The opposition Labour Party, which is expected to win national elections later this year, has already said it would implement all of the Cass Review recommendations when in government. Labour’s shadow minister for health told the Sun that he no longer stood by the statement that “trans women are women” in the wake of the review. 

The NHS Scotland and NHS Wales, which hold devolved responsibility for care in those countries, said they were reviewing Cass’ findings.

BELARUS

Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko. (Belarusian Telegraph Agency screenshot)

The government of Belarus issued a decree this week declaring that depictions of LGBTQ people may be considered illegal pornography, whether or not sexual acts are depicted.

The Culture Ministry amended a decree on “erotic materials” to include homosexuality or transgender as “non-traditional sexual relationship or behavior,” equivalent to necrophilia, pedophilia, and voyeurism. 

That may mean that depictions of LGBTQ people are considered pornography. Under Belarussian law, production, distribution and public displays of pornography are punishable with up to 4 years in prison, or up to 13 years for child pornography. 

Using these new definitions, an innocuous picture of a same-sex couple with their child, or a picture of a trans child, or a picture of two same-sex teens on a date, could all be considered child pornography.

According to Human Rights Watch, it is not yet clear how the government plans to interpret and enforce the new decree.

Belarus is one of the least free countries in Europe according to the human rights advocacy group Freedom House. Often considered a client state of neighboring Russia, Belarus tends to follow its larger neighbor culturally and politically. The country has bene governed by President Alexander Lukashenko since 1994, with political dissidents routinely jailed and media heavily censored. 

LGBTQ Belarusians lack any protections from discrimination, and anti-LGBTQ violence is common. Officials have floated introducing a Russia-style “gay propaganda” law over the years, but one has never been formally enacted.

Continue Reading

South America

Man convicted of killing Daniel Zamudio in Chile seeks parole

Raúl López Fuentes in 2013 sentenced to 15 years in prison

Published

on

Daniel Zamudio (Photo courtesy of Jacqueline Vera)

One of the four men convicted of murdering a young gay man in the Chilean capital in 2012 is seeking parole.

Raúl López Fuentes in 2013 received a 15-year prison sentence after he was convicted of killing Daniel Zamudio.

Zamudio was a young Chilean man who became a symbol of the fight against homophobic violence in his country and around the world after López and three other young men with alleged ties to a neo-Nazi group beat him for several hours in Santiago’s San Borja Park on March 2, 2012. Zamudio succumbed to his injuries a few weeks later.

The attack sparked widespread outage in Chile and prompted a debate over homophobia in the country that highlighted the absence of an anti-discrimination law. Lawmakers in the months after Zamudio’s murder passed a law that bears Zamudio’s name.

Patricio Ahumada received a life sentence, while López and Alejandro Angulo Tapia are serving 15 years in prison. Fabían Mora Mora received a 7-year prison sentence.

López has asked the Seventh Santiago Guarantee Court to serve the last three years of his sentence on parole. Zamudio’s family and Jaime Silva, their lawyer who works with the Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation, oppose the request.

Movilh represented Zamudio’s family after his murder.

Zamudio’s mother, Jacqueline Vera, during an exclusive interview with the Washington Blade said López’s petition “provoked all the anguish, all the commotion of his time.” 

“It was very cruel because in fact two days before we were at Daniel’s grave, where it was 12 years since his death and the beating,” said Vera. “He really does not deserve it.”

“We have gone through very difficult moments,” she added.

The mother, who later created a foundation to eradicate discrimination in Chile, was emphatic in indicating that she and her family “do not accept the release of this guy because he is a danger to society and a danger to ourselves.” 

“At the last hearing where they were sentenced, they told us that we are going to remember them when they get out,” said Vera. “They threatened us with death. There is a video circulating on social networks where they were in front of me and they laughed and made fun of me. They told me that I remembered that I had three more children.”

Daniel Zamudio’s mother, Jacqueline Vera. (Photo courtesy of Jacqueline Vera)

Regarding the possibility that the Chilean justice system will allow López to serve the remaining three years of his sentence on parole, Vera said “with the benefits here in Chile, which is like a revolving door where murderers come and go, it can happen.” 

“In any case, I don’t pretend, I don’t accept and I don’t want (López) to get out, I don’t want (López) to get out there,” she said. “We are fighting for him not to get out there because I don’t want him to get out there. And for me it is not like that, they have to serve the sentence as it stands.”

LGBTQ Chileans have secured additional rights since the Zamudio Law took effect. These include marriage equality and protections for transgender people. Advocacy groups, however, maintain lawmakers should improve the Zamudio Law.

“We are advocating for it to be a firmer law, with more strength and more condemnation,” said Vera.

When asked by the Washington Blade about what she would like to see improved, she indicated “the law should be for all these criminals with life imprisonment.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular