Connect with us

World

Vocal marriage opponent loses Costa Rica presidential election

Fabricio Alvarado lost to Carlos Alvarado by wide margin

Published

on

Fabricio Alvarado on April 1, 2018, lost the second round of Costa Rica’s presidential elections. (Photo by Iosepe; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)

A vocal opponent of marriage rights for same-sex couples on Sunday lost the second round of Costa Rica’s presidential election.

Official results indicate Fabricio Alvarado lost to Carlos Alvarado by a 39-61 percent margin.

Fabricio Alvarado — a Pentecostal minister, singer and former journalist who is a member of the National Restoration Party — and Carlos Alvarado of the leftist Citizen’s Action Party won the election’s first round on Feb. 4. Fabricio Alvarado and Carlos Alvarado, who are not related, faced off on Sunday because neither of them received at least 40 percent of the vote in the election’s first round.

Sunday’s election took place less than three months after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a landmark ruling that recognized same-sex marriage and transgender rights.

Outgoing Costa Rican Vice President Ana Helena Chacón subsequently announced her government would comply with the ruling. Fabricio Alvarado made his opposition to the decision a centerpiece of his campaign.

Carlos Alvarado publicly supports marriage rights for same-sex couples. He is also a member of outgoing President Luis Guillermo Solís’ party.

“I am very happy,” Margarita Salas, a Costa Rican LGBT rights advocate, told the Washington Blade on Sunday after Carlos Alvarado won the election. “Costa Rica today gave its strong and decisive support to human rights.”

Marcela Martino of the Center for Justice and International Law agreed with Salas.

“This result allows the country to firmly advance with the conviction that Costa Rica is a country in which everyone belongs,” Martino told the Blade.

Other LGBT rights advocates throughout Latin America also celebrated Carlos Alvarado’s victory.

“Costa Rica won,” wrote Andrea Ayala, executive director of Espacio de Mujeres Lesbianas por la Diversidad, an LGBT advocacy group in El Salvador, on her Facebook page.

Fabricio Alvarado pierde la elección presidencial costarricense

Un oponente vocal del matrimonio igualitario el domingo perdió la segunda vuelta de la elección presidencial de Costa Rica.

El Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones indica que Fabricio Alvarado perdió a Carlos Alvarado por un margin de 39-61 por ciento.

Fabricio Alvarado — un ministro pentecostal, cantante y experiodista quién es miembro del Partido Restauración Nacional — y Carlos Alvarado del Partido Acción Ciudadana de la izquierda ganaron la primera vuelta de la elección que se celebró el 4 de febrero. Fabricio Alvarado y Carlos Alvarado, quienes no están relacionados, se enfrentaron el domingo porque ningún candidato recibieron más de 40 por ciento del voto en la primera vuelta de la elección.

La elección del domingo se celebró menos de tres meses después de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos emitió un fallo histórico que reconoce el matrimonio entre parejas del mismo sexo y los derechos para la comunidad trans.

La vicepresidente saliente costarricense Ana Helena Chacón anunció su gobierno cumpliría con el fallo. Fabricio Alvarado hizo su oposición a la decisión una pieza central de su campaña.

Carlos Alvarado apoya públicamente el matrimonio igualitario. También es miembro del partido del presidente saliente Luis Guillermo Solís.

“Estoy super feliz,” dijo al Washington Blade Margarita Salas, una activista costarricense. “Costa Rica hoy le dio un apoyo fuerte y decidido a los derechos humanos.”

Marcela Martino del Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional estuvo de acuerdo con Salas.

“Este resultado permite al país avanzar firme en la convicción de que Costa Rica es un país en el que todas y todos cabemos,” Martino dijo al Blade.

Otras activistas en América Latina también celebraron la victoria de Carlos Alvarado.

“Ganó Costa Rica,” escribió Andrea Ayala, la directora ejecutiva de Espacio de Mujeres Lesbianas por la Diversidad, un grupo LGBT salvadoreño, en su página de Facebook.

Carlos Alvarado será el próximo presidente de Costa Rica. (Photo by Luis Madrigal Mena; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

South America

Argentinian President seeks to dismantle anti-discrimination agency

Critics of Milei’s government argue INADI’s closure is part of a strategy to consolidate power and repress dissent

Published

on

Argentinian President Javier Milei (left) is seen with supporters in San Nicolás de los Arroyos a city in the province of Buenos Aires, Argentina. (Photo Credit: Office of the President of Argentina)

By Esteban Rioseco | BUENOS AIRES, Argentina – Argentinian President Javier Milei’s proposed closure of his country’s National Institute Against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism has sparked widespread criticism among LGBTQ activists and human rights defenders.

Alba Rueda, the former Undersecretary of Diversity Policies in the Women, Gender and Diversity Ministry who was also the country’s Special Representative on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity under Alberto Fernández’s government, and gay Congressman Esteban Paulón in exclusive interviews with the Washington Blade talked about the Feb. 22 announcement’s implications and the impact it will have on Argentine society at a time marked by an acute economic, political and social crisis.

Rueda said INADI’s closure is a serious setback in the fight against discrimination and the advancement of human rights in Argentina. 

“INADI is a human rights agency that has been in force in Argentina for almost 30 years, which emerged as a response to the international attacks we suffered,” she pointed out. “This body has been fundamental in the attention of discrimination cases, including strategic litigation such as the (murder) of Diana Sacayán (a prominent transgender rights activist) in 2015.” 

Paulón said INADI’s closure is part of a broader policy of harassment towards diversity and state institutions that Milei’s government has carried out.

“INADI, along with the already eliminated Women Ministry, has been fundamental in the defense of the rights of LGBTQ+ and queer people,” said Paulón.

“In practical facts, the government cannot close INADI because INADI has been created by a law and it would require another law to close it,” he added. “Therefore, it has been raised that there is going to be a restructuring of personnel, a readjustment of resources that are going to continue processing complaints, but that they are going to pass to the orbit of the Justice Ministry, where INADI already is, but let’s say, they would pass without the institutionalism and that it would remain as an empty shell until the government achieves the consensus of a law to eliminate.”

Both agreed that INADI’s closure represents a serious setback in the protection of human rights in Argentina and a threat to the most vulnerable groups in society, including LGBTQ people. They also stressed Milei’s government has used this announcement as part of a broader strategy to dismantle democratic institutions and the country’s human rights agenda.

INADI cannot be closed unilaterally, despite the announcement, because a law created it and another statute would be required to dismantle it. There are, however, concerns the government may attempt to dismantle the institution or reduce its operational capacity.

“The decision to close INADI responds to an ideological position,” said Rueda. “They believe that INADI is the policeman of this, the ideological policeman. It is a body that functions autonomously whose president is appointed by the Congress and which also has a board of directors of social organizations.”

Critics of Milei’s government argue INADI’s closure is part of a strategy to consolidate power and repress dissent. They say the government is using the economic crisis as a pretext to implement authoritarian measures that limit civil liberties and weaken democratic institutions.

Milei’s supporters, on the other hand, defend the move as part of a broader effort to reduce public spending and promote liberal economic policies. They argue INADI’s closure is necessary to eliminate waste and corruption in government, and that its impact on human rights and LGBTQ protection is overstated.

“For LGTB people in particular, the closure of INADI would leave us without a place where we could basically receive attention in the face of discrimination,” Rueda pointed out. “And another issue that INADI also did is that it generated public policy recommendations or developed public policies for the prevention and awareness of these changes that have to take place in society.”

“So, not only do we run out of spaces for denunciation, but also of where to change this culture of discrimination, culture of discrimination that are present in the labor market that Milei presents or points out to you, as a success and that this is self-regulated,” she added. 

******************************************************************************************

Photo Credit: Movilh

Esteban Rioseco is a Chilean digital communicator, LGBT rights activist and politician. He was spokesperson and executive president of the Homosexual Integration and Liberation Movement (Movilh). He is currently a Latin American correspondent for the Washington Blade newspaper .

On October 22, 2015, together with Vicente Medel, he celebrated the first gay civil union in Chile in the Governorate of Concepción .

Continue Reading

South America

Authorities arrest alleged masterminds of Rio councilwoman’s murder

Marielle Franco and her driver killed on March 14, 2018

Published

on

Marielle Franco (Facebook photo)

RIO DE JANEIRO — Brazilian authorities on Sunday arrested two people who they say masterminded the 2018 murder of Rio de Janeiro Municipal Councilwoman Marielle Franco and her driver.

The Associated Press reported the country’s federal police arrested Congressman Chiquinho Brazão and his brother, former Rio de Janeiro Legislative Assemblyman Domingos Brazão, who advises the state’s Audits Court. Authorities on Sunday also took into custody former Rio police chief Rivaldo Barbosa and charged him with obstruction of justice.

Authorities say two former fire fighters — Elcio de Queiroz and Ronnie Lessa — shot Franco and Anderson Gomes in Rio’s Lapa neighborhood on March 14, 2018.

Franco, a bisexual woman and single mother of African descent, grew up in Maré, a favela in the northern part of Rio that is close to the city’s international airport. Franco, among other things, was an outspoken critic of police raids in Rio’s favelas that have left hundreds of people dead.

Authorities last July arrested Maxwell Simões Correia, a former firefighter who allegedly hid the guns that De Queiroz and Lessa used to shoot Franco and Gomes. The Brazilian Supreme Court last week approved a plea agreement into which Lessa entered. 

The AP reported Federal Justice Minister Ricardo Lewandowski at a press conference told reporters the Brazão brothers have “multiple interests” and Chiquinho Brazão, who was a member of the Rio Municipal Council in 2018, was angry about Franco’s bill that would have zoned land for public housing in the city. The Brazão brothers also have reported ties to militias in the city.

“At this moment we have it very clear who are the perpetrators of this hateful, heinous crime of political nature,” said Lewandowski.

Franco’s widow, Mônica Benício, who was elected to the Rio Municipal Council in 2020, discussed the status of the investigation with the Washington Blade during a March 2022 interview in Rio.

“The struggle for justice to find out who ordered the murder and how high up they were indicates we are still far from knowing,” said Benício.

Franco’s family in a statement said their fight for justice will continue.

“This case reflects the structural impunity in cases of crimes committed by agents or former agents of the State against the lives of human and civil rights defenders, such as Marielle and Anderson Gomes, segments of society that suffer widespread damage to rights in society and have structural difficulty in accessing justice,” it reads.

Domingos Brazão’s lawyer has denied the allegations against his client, saying he “did not know Marielle.” Chiquinho Brazão and Barbosa have also proclaimed their innocence. 

The three men, who were arrested in Rio, will be transferred to Brasília, the country’s capital.

Continue Reading

Africa

Ugandan lawmaker introduces anti-gay surrogacy bill

Sarah Opendi’s measure mirrors attempt in Kenya

Published

on

Ugandan flag (Image by rarrarorro/Bigstock)

KAMPALA, Uganda — Uganda has joined Kenya in seeking to ban same-sex couples who want to use a surrogate or in vitro fertilization to become parents.

MP Sarah Opendi on March 5 introduced the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill 2023, which would limit access to these treatments to only people with infertility challenges. She notes there has been an increase in the number of Ugandans seeking to have children through human assisted reproductive technology over the years, but without a legal framework. 

“The increasing demand for the use of human assisted reproductive technology has been necessitated by the growing cases of primary and secondary infertility, and other health-related challenges among persons seeking to have children,” Opendi states in the bill. 

Legal gaps the law seeks to address include regulating access to the use of human assisted reproductive technology by a state’s medical body; designating medical units or facilities as fertility centers; setting up sperm, oocyte (a female egg) and embryo banks within fertility centers and a register of data collected from services rendered through the technology.  

The bill’s Clause 20 would block gay couples from having children via surrogacy and would give a registered medical practitioner the power to establish the infertility condition of an individual before accessing services. 

The medical professional would have to certify that the intending parent “suffers primary or secondary infertility” or “suffers health challenges which affect the ability to reproduce.” 

The bill would also bar same-sex couples from surrogacy services for parenthood, stating they apply to “a man and a woman” who jointly seek to use human assisted reproductive technology to obtain a child. The proposal would also apply to a man and a woman where “either the man or woman or both” suffer primary or secondary infertility or health-related challenges that affect the man or woman’s ability to reproduce.     

The proposed law, which a parliamentary health committee is considering for public input before its reintroduction in the House for debate, has been criticized by some Ugandan LGBTQ+ activists as “draconian.”

“The same sponsors of the anti-gay law are the same introducing this bill which is well influenced by American anti-gay and anti-gender groups,” Frank Mugisha told the Washington Blade.

His comments came three days after the U.S. denied Opendi a visa that would have allowed her to attend a Commission on the Status of Women at the U.N. meeting in New York.

Reports indicate the visa denial is because of anti-LGBTQ+ comments that include the castration of gay men that she made during the parliamentary debate on the Anti-Homosexuality Act. Mugisha applauded the U.S. decision, saying she should not be able to promote hate against LGBTQ+ people “anywhere else.”

“The bill is very draconian, has so many limitations for our men and families that do not conform to old draconian conservative ideologies,” said Mugisha in response to the surrogacy bill. “The bill would outlaw women who are not married from having IVF and we need to pay attention to this bull and stop it.” 

The Ugandan surrogacy bill limiting same-sex couples from parenthood adds to a list of recent anti-LGBTQ+ measures like Anti-Homosexuality Act that saw the country sanctioned.

The Court of Appeal on March 12 declared it is illegal for LGBTQ+ rights groups to register in Uganda. Parliament Speaker Anita Among, a strong anti-homosexuality crusader, during the parliamentary session two days after the ruling commended Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny and the Ugandan judiciary he leads for saving the country from “values that are alien and want to destroy our society.” 

Kenya’s proposed surrogacy law, dubbed the Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill 2022, is also before the parliamentary health committee. MP Millie Odhiambo last May reintroduced the bill, which would prohibit gay and lesbian couples from having children via surrogate.

The measure stalled in the Kenyan Senate in 2022. House rules rendered it “dead” when the parliamentary term ended because of that year’s general election. It could only be saved through a reintroduction in the new Parliament. 

The Kenyan surrogacy bill, just like the one that Opendi introduced, would only permit a man and a woman (intending parents) with certified infertility problems to have children via surrogate and IVF.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Israeli Supreme Court: Country must allow two mothers on child’s birth certificate

LGBTQ activists praised the ruling

Published

on

The Israeli Supreme Court (Photo by the Israeli Supreme Court; public domain)

WDG, the Washington Blade’s media partner in Israel, published this article on their website on Thursday.

JERUSALEM — Supreme Court judges on Thursday unanimously ruled that the Population Authority must register female couples as mothers on the birth certificates of their children they have together.

The decision was made following a petition submitted by nine female couples, mothers of children born through anonymous sperm donation. The panel of judges, headed by Supreme Court President Uzi Fogelman and Judges Ruth Ronen and Alex Stein, rejected the Population Authority’s claim that the birth certificate reflects only biological parentage and ruled that both the birth mother and her partner must be registered as the child’s parent.

“The exclusion of the non-biological parent from the birth certificate means a preference for the position of the biological parent over parenting based on other parents,” Fogelman wrote in the ruling. “In terms of substantive law, the parenting of both parents — the biological parent and the non-biological parent — is equal and it includes the same basket of parental rights and duties. I do not believe that when at the level of substantive law there is equality between the parents, there is room to distinguish between them at the level of registration in the birth certificate.”

Fogelman also referred to the interpretation that may be given to the lack of registration on the birth certificate as “an offensive message according to which we are dealing with relationships that are different in nature and essence: while biological parentage is ‘real’ parentage, non-biological parentage is inferior and suspect parentage, a kind of ‘conditional’ parentage.”

The ruling does not apply to male couples because the petition dealt with couples who conceived with the help of anonymous sperm donation.

The ruling was issued as part of a petition submitted around eight years ago by nine female couples, who claimed that not registering the non-biological mother on the birth certificate deprives the child of rights that include acquiring foreign citizenship and petitioned the Interior Ministry and the Population and Immigration Authority to issue their children amended birth certificates that include the names of both mothers.

The Population Authority refused the couples’ request on the grounds that the birth certificate is a document that reflects the biological parentage at the time of birth, and is not updated with the passage of time. The petitioners claimed that the Population Authority’s policy violates the right to family life and the right to equality, since it discriminates against same-sex couples. And as evidence, they pointed out that when it comes to heterosexual couples, the Interior Ministry issues them corrected birth certificates — even in cases of adoption by the spouse of the biological mother or in the case where sperm donation is used for the birth of the child.

Fogelman accepted the respondents’ position according to which the birth certificate was intended to document the identity of the child at the initial point in time of his life. Alongside this, he rejected the respondents’ position that the birth certificate was intended to reflect biological parentage.

“A birth certificate is one of the most important documents a person has. It confers a basket of rights and is also used for the purpose of regulating citizenship in foreign countries,” said attorneys Daniela Ya’akobi, Hagai Kalai and Achinoam Orbach, who represented the petitioners. “For all these years, the state has insisted on denying children of two mothers a birth certificate that reflects the reality of their lives. The judgment of the High Court of Justice put an end to ugly and unnecessary discrimination, which has no purpose and never had. It is a great victory, but no man needs or wants to win his country. The time has come for the state, on its own initiative, to allow full equality of rights for all its citizens, including LGBT people.”

Aguda Chair Hila Peer responded to the ruling.

“This is a historic day when our families are equal,” she said. “For years the Interior Ministry has refused to register proud mothers on the birth certificate and now, thanks to the High Court of Justice, we are taking a significant step towards equality.”

Continue Reading

South America

Chilean government urged to advance comprehensive sex education bill

Advocacy group sent request to Education Minister Claudio Cataldo

Published

on

La Moneda, the Chilean Presidential Palace, in Santiago, Chile (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

By Esteban Rioseco | SANTIAGO, Chile — A Chilean advocacy group has submitted an urgent request to Education Minister Claudio Cataldo that urges President Gabriel Boric’s government to promote a comprehensive sex education bill.

The Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation asserts the implementation of a comprehensive sex education curriculum is essential to ensuring all students, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, have access to an inclusive education without discrimination. The group also argues inclusive guidelines are crucial to promoting sexual and reproductive health and preventing gender-based violence and bullying.

“We met with the minister of education to ask him to promote a comprehensive sexual education bill, since it is of utmost importance that children and adolescents have this type of education,” Movilh spokesperson Javiera Zuñiga told the Washington Blade. “In addition, there is a commitment on the part of the state of Chile that was acquired in the Friendly Settlement Agreement before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights for the demand of equal marriage, where the State commits itself to generate education policies.”

Zuñiga explained that “comprehensive sex education addresses several issues that are not dealt with in Chile today, which have to do not only with sexual orientation or gender identity, but also often have to do with knowing the body, being able to have tools to deal with abuse and also to know about sexually transmitted diseases. It is a wide range of topics that our children and adolescents today do not have access to know.” 

The request comes at a crucial moment amid the ongoing debate over sex education in Chile.

The lack of a comprehensive policy has generated concern among various sectors of society, especially among LGBTQ+ organizations and human rights activists who have pointed out the urgent need to implement concrete measures to address this issue.

Faced with this new debate, Emilia Schneider, the country’s first Transgender member of Congress, told the Blade she thinks “it is very good that Movilh joins many organizations that have been demanding and working for CSE (comprehensive sex education) for years in Chile.” These groups include Apofa, the Feminist Teachers Network and Chile Necesita CSE.

“I believe that their request is correct in the sense that comprehensive sexual education is necessary and is demanded by the educational communities themselves,” said Schneider. 

Cataldo in response to Movilh’s request has expressed his willingness to dialogue and collaborate in the elaboration of a comprehensive bill. The government has yet to announce any concrete measures it plans to take to advance it. 

Schneider explained that “for me CSE is a central issue, it has always been and I have been working for it for years.” 

“Of course, my commitment remains intact,” she said. “There are already many bills on comprehensive sex education, which shows that it is a long debate that is still open in Chile. There is even a bill that (former President Sebastián Piñera)’s education minister, Marcela Cubillos, presented, and one from Republicans. I would call on the different sectors to sit down and reach an agreement once and for all before sending me an individual (bill.)” 

Organizing Trans Diversities President Ignacia Oyarzún told the Blade that “all the needs we have as a community are urgent and are a priority and unfortunately all these urgencies are for yesterday.” 

“We are talking about laws and regulations that protect the human rights of a community that has been historically violated,” said Oyarzún. “We are talking about a community that has been exterminated throughout history, both by society and by regulations. So we are talking about a community that deserves special protection”.

With regard to eventual support for this bill in Congress, Schneider pointed out that “unfortunately, the scenario for the CSE is very difficult.” 

“That is why we have to be very strategic in order to move forward,” she said. “There is an international organization of the ultra-right to prevent us from advancing in this very important right, organizations such as Con Mis Hijos No Te Metas in other countries have even been associated with serious cases of child abuse. One wonders who they are defending. Either they are with the children and youth who are safer and protected with information and accompaniment or they are on the side of the abusers.” 

“I hope there is a majority that understands that we can reach agreements to move forward, especially because the CSE is something that is constantly demanded by the educational communities,” added Schneider. “This does not exist today, and that is why we need a lot of capacity for dialogue and drive to build it, but above all to go out to do a lot of pedagogy and explain to the population its importance, especially to prevent and combat child sexual abuse.” 

Oyarzún said “we believe that if we leave aside the more ideological issues and concentrate on what is really important, which are these children and adolescents, we could have a significant advance in Congress.”

Continue Reading

European Union

Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar resigns

Gay head of government first elected in 2017

Published

on

Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar announces his resignation on March 20, 2024. (The Telegraph/YouTube screenshot)

DUBLIN, Ireland — Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar on Wednesday announced he will step down once his party selects his successor.

Varadkar, who is gay, also said he will immediately resign as Fine Gael’s leader.

“My reasons for stepping down are both personal and political,” said Varadkar in comments he made outside the government’s offices in Dublin, the Irish capital.

Varadkar, 45, became Ireland’s first gay prime minister in 2017.

He raised LGBTQ+ issues with Pope Francis when he visited Ireland in 2018.

Varadkar the following year attended a St. Patrick’s Day breakfast at then-Vice President Mike Pence’s official residence in D.C. with his husband, Dr. Matthew Barrett. Varadkar and Barrett last week attended a St. Patrick’s Day event that Vice President Kamala Harris and second gentleman Doug Emhoff hosted at the Naval Observatory.

Varadkar in 2020 stepped down after Fine Gael lost 15 Parliament seats in a general election, but remained in the Irish government. Varadkar once again became prime minister in 2022.  

Varadkar announced his resignation four days after Irish voters rejected proposals that would have amended language in the country’s constitution that says a woman’s place is in the home and families are based on marriage. (Ireland in 2015 became the first country to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples through a referendum.)

The Irish government last year pledged to ban so-called conversion therapy. The country’s hate speech law has included gender identity since 2022.

“I’ve proudly made the country a more equal and more modern place when it comes to children, the LGBT community, equality for women and their bodily autonomy,” said Varadkar. 

Continue Reading

India

India court allows Trans woman to participate in Armed Forces’ youth wing

Feb. 29 ruling in Kerala state upheld other judge’s decision

Published

on

Indian flag (Photo by Rahul Sapra via Bigstock)

KOCHI, India — A Kerala High Court judge on Feb. 29 upheld another magistrate’s ruling that allowed a Transgender woman to participate in the Indian Armed Forces’ youth wing as a female.

The High Court set aside a part of the order that directed the central government to amend the NCC Act to allow Trans people to enroll based on their gender identity.

“When the petitioner has been given the identity of a female, she is certainly entitled to be enrolled in the NCC under section 6(2) of the NCC Act,” said Justice Anu Sivaraman. “In the light of the aforesaid provisions of the Transgenders Act and also in the light of the dictum laid down by the Apex Court in National Legal Service Authority (NALSA).” 

The judge said that the court cannot direct the government to amend the law, but expressed hope that the Indian government would amend the NCC Act to expressly allow the entry of Trans candidates to the NCC.

The Kerala High Court said that the fact that the National Cadet Corps Act does not recognize the third gender cannot be a reasonable justification to deny entry to a Trans person.

Hina Haneefa had filed a petition with the High Court that challenged a section of the NCC Act that only allowed males and females under Section 6 of the law to enroll in the Cadet Corps.

“In view of the specific provisions of the 2019 act, a Transgender person has the right to be recognized not only as a Transgender but also a right to self-perceived gender, i.e. the female gender,” said Sivaraman. “The denial of enrollment is unsustainable. The petitioner will be entitled to participate in the selection process on the basis of her application. If she is successful, the petitioner will be enrolled in the NCC Unit.”

Haneefa is a Trans woman who applied to enroll in the NCC after undergoing gender-affirming procedures and getting her identity card. The NCC denied her application. 

Parliament in 2019 passed Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act of 2019, which extended rights to Trans people.  

While talking with the Washington Blade, Kalki Subramaniam, an Indian Trans activist, queer artist, entrepreneur and actor, said Trans people in the country have to fight for the inclusion of Trans people in all sectors.

“We have to go to the court, we have to fight with the system, then the high court directs the state and the central government to take inclusive steps. Again and again, repetitive,” said Subramaniam. “Why should Trans people should struggle for everything? I am sure, the central government is working towards equality and inclusion because they recently published Equal Opportunity Policy for Transgender Persons. The government will consider this to include trans people in NCC. What I am looking for is the inclusion of Transgender people in the Indian military. That could be a long term plan, but it is possible and ultimately rests in the government’s hands.”

Subramaniam expressed her firm belief that all Indian citizens, including members of the Trans community, deserve the opportunity to serve the country. She emphasized the potential of Trans individuals to contribute to national defense and public service, highlighting both the military and civil services as avenues for their inclusion. Subramaniam voiced her confidence in the central government of India’s willingness to address this issue and expressed hope for future action.

Souvik Saha, an LGBTQ+ activist and founder of People for Change, one of India’s premier advocacy groups, said he supports the Kerala High Court ruling.

“This decision is a significant step towards inclusivity and recognizing the rights of Transgender individuals to participate fully in all aspects of society,” said Saha. “The NCC Act currently only allows for the enrollment of male and female cadets, which is discriminatory against Transgender individuals and reinforces harmful binary gender norms. By ordering the central government to amend the NCC Act to accommodate Transgender individuals, the Kerala High Court is acknowledging the need for legal protections and equal opportunities for all genders.”

Saha said the decision will set a positive precedent for other institutions and organizations to follow suit in recognizing and accommodating Trans people. Souvik added it sends a clear message that discrimination based on gender identity is not acceptable and that Trans people have the right to equal opportunities and access to resources.

“Moreover, allowing Transgender individuals to enroll in the NCC provides them with valuable opportunities for personal development, leadership training, and civic engagement,” he said. “By participating in programs like the NCC, Transgender individuals can gain skill, confidence, and a sense of belonging, which are essential for their overall well-being and success.”

“Overall, the Kerala High Court’s decision to allow a Transgender woman to enroll in the NCC is a significant victory for LGBTQ rights and a crucial step towards creating a more inclusive and equitable society,” he added. “It is imperative that the central government swiftly amends the NCC Act to ensure that Transgender individuals are not excluded or discriminated against based on their gender identity.”

Ankush Kumar is a reporter who has covered many stories for Washington and Los Angeles Blades from Iran, India and Singapore. He recently reported for the Daily Beast. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is on Twitter at @mohitkopinion. 

Continue Reading

World

Out in the World: LGBTQ+ news from Europe & Asia

LGBTQ+ news stories from around the globe including the Untied Kingdom, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Japan & Thailand

Published

on

Los Angeles Blade graphic

UNITED KINGDOM

British Houses of Parliament in London, England. (Photo Credit: UK Government)

By Erin Reed | LONDON, UK – Following a recent decision in England by the National Health Service to stop prescribing puberty blockers for transgender youth, former U.K. Prime Minister Liz Truss introduced a bill that would outlaw gender-affirming care for trans youth. The bill would also eliminate any recognition of social transition and would define sex to exclude transgender individuals in the Equality Act. Currently, transgender youth can still access gender-affirming care through private clinics. However, Truss’s bill ran into trouble on Friday when, instead of being debated, Members of Parliament spent hours deliberating over ferrets and pet names, exhausting the available time and preventing the bill from being heard.

As of this week, the National Health Service in England has declared that it will no longer permit transgender youth to receive puberty blockers for gender dysphoria. Although the announcement sparked significant public backlash, its practical impact was somewhat mitigated by the extreme waitlist for care, which exceeds five years. Only a hundred transgender youth had been prescribed blockers of the thousands waiting for an appointment. Importantly, the decision does not affect care through clinical research trials and does not affect private clinics—a route many parents had already pursued due to the surging wait times at the limited number of NHS clinics providing care.

Former Prime Minister Liz Truss introduced a bill aimed at curbing that latter route of obtaining care. The proposed legislation would criminalize the prescription of gender-affirming care to transgender youth. It seeks to prevent “the recognition of gender inconsistency in children,” which is defined as “referring to a child with language that is inconsistent with their sex” and “treating a child in a manner that is inconsistent with their sex.” However, the bill does not specify how boys and girls should be treated in accordance with the law. Additionally, it proposes amendments to the Equality Act to define sex to exclude transgender individuals and end protections in bathrooms and other similar spaces.

See these lines from the bill here:

However, when the time arrived to debate bills, Members of Parliament diverted their attention to hours of discussions about ferrets and pet animal names within the context of an animal welfare bill. In one notable interaction, Labour MP Sarah Champion addressed Labour MP Maria Eagle, remarking humorously on the frequent mentions of ferrets:

MP Champion: “I am very interested in my honorable friend’s, well, key mention of ferrets at every opportunity in this debate. I’d like to put on record that my brother had a ferret called Oscar.”

(Laughter)

MP Eagle: “Well she has that now on the record. I don’t know really what else to say about that except that I’m sure that Oscar brought her brother great joy, and that’s what pets do, and I’m sure there are many other ferret owners who might attest to the same thing.”

You can watch the exchange here:

In another exchange, even some conservatives appeared to be in on it, such as Mark Spencer, who spoke at length listing off of many pets that had been named and put on the record.

MP Mark Spencer: “I am confident that Members of all parties will agree that animals have been of great support to individuals and families, particularly during covid-19, when my pets were certainly of great support to me. Pets often help to keep people sane when they are under pressure in their everyday pursuits, so it would be remiss of me not to put on the record the names of my three dogs, Tessa, Barney and Maisie, and the name of my cat, Parsnip. There has been a proud tradition this morning of mentioning various pets, including: Harry, George, Henry, Bruce, Snowy, Maisie, Scamp, Becky 1, Becky 2, Tiny, Tilly, Pippin, Kenneth, Roger, Poppy, Juno, Lucky, Lulu, Brooke, Lucy, Marcus and Toby, who are the dogs; and not forgetting Perdita, Nala, Colin, who is sadly no longer with us, Frank, two Smudges, Attlee, Orna, Hetty, Stanley, Mia Cat, Sue, Sulekha, Cassio, Othello, Clapton, Tigger, who is sadly no longer with us, and Pixie, who are the cats.”

The lengthy exchanges on pet names and ferrets ran the time out, and as such, the bill targeting transgender people could not be heard. The lengthy discussion, which has since been referred to as a filibuster, echoes filibusters that have occurred in the United States to kill similar legislation, including recently in West Virginia on a bill that also would have defined sex in an identical way.

The exchanges provided a ray of hope for trans residents in England, which has been beset by anti-trans politics in recent years. Likewise, it was a sign that the Labour Party, which has previously been seen as “backsliding” on transgender rights, has not completely abandoned its transgender constituents. Though the bill is not officially dead, it has been placed at the bottom of the priority list for March 22nd, meaning it almost certainly will not be debated, with government sources calling the bill “unworkable.”

For those who advocate for transgender rights, however, the ferret has become “an overnight symbol of trans resistance” and a sign that anti-trans politics may be reaching their limit even in the United Kingdom.

IRELAND

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey greets Ireland’s openly gay prime minister Leo Varadkar in Boston on March 13, 2024. (Photo Credit: Office of Governor Maura Healey)

By Rob Salerno | DUBLIN, Ireland – The Irish people delivered a major rebuke to the political establishment by voting overwhelmingly against a pair of constitutional referendums that had been endorsed by all parties which would have amended language in the constitution that says a woman’s place is in the home, and that families are based on marriage.

The government had held the referendum on International Women’s Day, March 8, in a symbolic move, and turnout was measured at 44.4%. Results were announced the following day.

Ireland’s openly gay prime minister Leo Varadkar accepted defeat Saturday.

“It was our responsibility to convince the majority of people to vote ‘yes’ and we clearly failed to do so,” Varadkar said.

The first question, which was defeated 67% to 33%, asked voters to add the words “whether founded on marriage or on other durable relationships,” to the constitution’s definition of “family,” in order to be more inclusive of diverse family types.

The second question, which was defeated by a similar margin, as voters to delete a clause that says “the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved. The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.”

Critics say the language promotes sexist gender stereotypes. The revised language would have used gender-neutral language to recognize “the provision of care, by members of a family to one another.” 

Advocacy group LGBTQ Ireland had called for people to vote “yes” to both referendums, “so all children and families, including LGBTQ families, are recognised equally in the Constitution.”

But a persuasive “no” campaign had arisen that alleged the revision would have struck women’s privileges and rights. Forces aligned against the referendum included some progressive and feminist groups that alleged the proposed language was unclear and lacked consultation.  

Irish voters have in recent years approved a number of progressive reforms to their constitution, including streamlining the divorce process in 2019, legalizing abortion and decriminalizing blasphemy in 2018, and legalizing same-sex marriage in 2015.

LIECHTENSTEIN

Landtag of Liechtenstein (Parliament) in the capital city of Vaduz.
(Photo Credit: Principality of Liechtenstein)

By Rob Salerno | VADUZ, Liechtenstein – The tiny principality of Liechtenstein got one step closer to full equality for LGBTQ people as its parliament approved a bill to legalize same-sex marriage with a 24-1 vote, bringing a years-long process nearly to a close.

Local LGBTQ advocacy group FLAY expressed gratitude to members of Landtag, the Liechtenstein parliament, for advancing the law last week.

“Thank you for 24x ‘yes’ in the Landtag,” the group posted to its Facebook page.

“FLay the association for the queer community in Liechtenstein is very happy that 24 out of 25 deputies in parliament voted in favour on today’s first reading.
Keeping in mind the completely blocked situation only 3 years ago, the denial of our government for participating any public discussion, we can be more than proud and happy on our successful steps towards the legitimation of the civil marriage for all,” Stefan Marxer, a FLay board member told the Blade in an email.

The marriage bill is expected to pass second reading before the summer parliamentary break, and come into effect by January 1, 2025, unless a referendum is called on the issue.

The tiny country of about 40,000 people, about the size of Washington, D.C., has made major progress on advancing LGBTQ rights in the last decade, though the International Gay and Lesbian Association-Europe ranked the country 38th among 49 European countries in its annual survey of LGBTQ rights on the continent last year.

Liechtenstein has allowed same-sex couples to form registered partnerships with limited rights since 2011. The registered partnership law was subject to a referendum after gay rights opponents collected more than 1,000 signatures demanding it. The law was approved by voters 69% to 31%.

A same-sex couple had sued the state seeking the right to marriage in 2017, but ultimately lost when the state court ruled that the ban on same-sex marriage was not unconstitutional. However, the court did find that the law banning same-sex couples from adopting was unconstitutional and ordered the country to amend the law. It eventually did so last year.

Discussion of marriage equality began in earnest in Liechtenstein after neighboring Switzerland passed its same-sex marriage law in its parliament in 2020. 

One obstacle was the Prince, who wields significant executive authority in Liechtenstein compared to other European monarchies. In 2021, Prince Hans-Adam II said that while he supported same-sex marriage, he would not support adoption rights. That obstacle seemed to disappear when the state court ordered the government to legalize full adoption rights. By 2022, Hans-Adam’s son Alois, who governs as regent, told a magazine that same-sex marriage was “not a problem.”

The Catholic Church had also intervened, with the former Archbishop of Liechtenstein Wolfgang Haas leading a campaign against the bill and cancelling a traditional service at the opening of last year’s Parliament in protest. Haas retired last autumn.

Despite broad agreement among legislators, the same-sex marriage law has taken a slow path through Parliament. In November 2022, Parliament voted 23-2 asking the government to bring forward a same-sex marriage bill. The government held a three-month-long public consultation on same-sex marriage last year before putting the bill on the agenda for Parliament’s March 2024 meeting. 

Under the marriage bill, the country will stop registering new partnerships, and people in partnerships will have the option of converting them to marriages or keeping them as they are. All other rights will be equalized.

Liechtenstein is the last German-speaking country to legalize same-sex marriage. Around the world, 37 countries have legalized same-sex marriage, including 21 countries in Europe. The most recent country to legalize same-sex marriage is Greece, and Thailand is expected to pass a same-sex marriage law later this year.

JAPAN

Since 2019, the advocacy group Marriage For All Japan has sued the Japanese government in all five district courts. This ruling by the Sapporo court comes as a victory in the fight to make same-sex marriage legal. (Photo Credit: Marriage For All Japan)

By Rob Salerno | TOKYO, Japan – Two courts ruled on this past Thursday that Japan’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, increasing pressure on the government to legalize it.

District courts have been weighing same-sex marriage since several coordinated cases were filed across the country in 2019. Along with Thursday’s ruling from the Tokyo District Court, five district courts have ruled that the ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, while one court has upheld the ban. A seventh district court case was filed last month. 

But on Thursday, the Sapporo High Court delivered the first ruling on same-sex marriage at the appellate level, and same-sex couples won there, too. 

So far, all courts have dismissed claims for monetary compensation.

It’s likely that all of the cases will end up at the Supreme Court. 

In a statement released after the ruling, the plaintiffs’ lawyers called on the government to act swiftly to protect their rights.

“I would like to reiterate that this shows that there is no time left for legal reform. The government should take seriously this judgment that found this provision to be unconstitutional… and promptly amend the law to allow marriage between same-sex couples,” the statement says.

Under Japan’s legal system, courts rarely invalidate or amend laws that are ruled unconstitutional, leaving that to the legislature.

But Japan’s national government has long been cold to LGBTQ rights. Last year, queer activists had hoped that the government would finally pass a long-demanded anti-discrimination bill, but by the time it was put before the legislature, it had been watered down to a bill that only calls on the government to promote understanding of LGBTQ people.

At the local level, queer activists have seen greater success. Twenty-nine of Japan’s forty-seven prefectures, as well as hundreds of municipalities, have enacted partnership registries for same-sex couples that at least afford some limited rights.

THAILAND

Pita Limjaroenrat, a member of Parliament holding his phone takes a selfie with Pride goers last year at Bangkok Pride. (Photo Credit: Pita Limjaroenrat/Facebook)

By Rob Salerno | BANGKOK, Thailand – Same-sex marriage could soon be a reality in the Southeast Asian country, as a bill to legalize cleared its first test in the legislature Thursday. 

A committee set up by the House of Representatives to examine the bill approved it, setting it up for a final vote in the House on March 27. After that, it will need to be approved by the Senate, which is dominated by appointees of the former military junta that ruled the country until 2017. It is expected that the bill will pass into law by the end of the year.

The proposed bill gives same-sex couples equal rights to married heterosexual couples, including in inheritance, tax rights, and adoption.

Same-sex marriage and LGBTQ rights generally have become a major political issue in Thailand in recent years, with queer people becoming increasingly visible and demanding greater equality. 

Parties promising to legalize same-sex marriage and promote LGBTQ rights were the major victors of last year’s election, although the leading party was controversially disqualified from forming a government due to its support for reforming laws that penalize disparaging the monarchy, which was deemed unconstitutional. Nevertheless, the parties that formed government agreed to pass a same-sex marriage law, and last December, the house voted overwhelmingly to approve in principle a series of draft marriage bills.  

The new government has also signaled that it will soon introduce a bill to facilitate legal gender change for trans people, and has begun a campaign to provide free HIV medication as an effort to eliminate HIV transmission by 2030.

Reporting by Erin Reed and Rob Salerno

Continue Reading

Africa

Burundi’s president reiterates LGBTQ people should be stoned 

Ndayishimiye during the commemoration of the International Women’s Day reiterated his call for LGBTQ people to be stoned in a stadium

Published

on

Burundian President Évariste Ndayishimiye (Screen capture via Gentil Gedeon Official YouTube)

GITEGA, Burundi – Burundian President Évariste Ndayishimiye on March 8 reiterated his call for LGBTQ people to be stoned in a stadium.

Ndayishimiye made the remark during the commemoration of the International Women’s Day in Gitega, the country’s political capital. He first called for the public stoning of LGBTQ people last December during a public event.

LGBTQ activists sharply criticized the comments and some international diplomats even threatened to cut economic ties with Burundi. Ndayishimiye, however, seems unmoved by this pushback and maintained that if it meant if his nation would cut economic ties with the developed countries on the basis of his anti-LGBTQ stance then so be it, reaffirming that nothing will change his stance.  

Jésus Dior Kant, a gay man and LGBTQ activist from Burundi, said the president’s remarks are tantamount to publicly calling for the lynching of gay people.

“This violent and anti-LGBT+ rhetoric endangers the lives of many individuals in Burundi and stains the nation’s commitment to human rights,” said Kant. “Such discourse not only incites homophobia and violence but also violates international human rights laws and norms that protect individuals regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”

Kant also said what Ndayishimiye said now poses a real and immediate threat for LGBTQ people in the country.

“The impact of this statement is not merely rhetorical, it poses a real and immediate threat to the safety and well-being of the LGBT+ community in Burundi,” said Kant. “It encourages hate crimes, promotes discrimination and undermines progress made towards equality and justice. This is not just a problem for the LGBT+ community but a stain on the moral fabric of our global society, reflecting on us all.”

Kant called for Ndayishimiye to immediately withdraw his remarks and commit to protecting the rights of LGBTQ people in the country.

“Your call to stone gay individuals constitutes a blatant violation of human rights and an incitement to violence and discrimination,” said Kant. “We implore you to take the necessary measures to withdraw your statement advocating violence against the LGBT+ community, commit to protecting LGBT+ individuals in Burundi by enforcing laws that guarantee rights and well-being and respecting international human rights conventions, ensuring that Burundi is a nation that respects and values every human life.” 

Clémentine de Montjoye, a researcher at Human Rights Watch’s Africa Division, said the anti-LGBTQ crackdown in Burundi could become worse, including continued political repression and restrictions on freedom of expression to maintain the governing party’s control. 

“This type of fearmongering is not new in Burundi, where sexual relations between people of the same sex have been illegal since former President Pierre Nkurunziza signed a new criminal code into law in 2009,” noted de Montjove. “The law was a fierce blow to Burundi’s LGBT people, who had begun to come out and organize, albeit in small numbers, to demand their rights be respected.”

De Montjove further noted the National Assembly’s human rights commission added the anti-homosexuality provision in the 2009 criminal code at the last minute, apparently under pressure from Nkurunziza, who made statements on television that described homosexuality as a curse.

“Ndayishimiye, who presents himself as a progressive, rights-respecting leader, should be working to reverse this trend rather than stoking more fear and hatred,” said de Montjoye.

Continue Reading

United Nations

US global LGBTQ+, intersex rights envoy participates in UN women’s conference

Jessica Stern traveled to N.Y. this week

Published

on

Jessica Stern, the special U.S. envoy for the promotion of LGBTQ+ and intersex rights abroad, center, speaks outside the U.N. Security Council on March 20, 2023. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

By Amber Laenen | UNITED NATIONS — Jessica Stern, the special U.S. envoy for the promotion of LGBTQ+ and intersex rights abroad, traveled to New York this week to participate in the 68th session of the Commission on the Status of Women at the U.N.

Stern arrived in New York on Tuesday and left on Friday.

The CSW68, the largest annual U.N. gathering on gender equality and women’s empowerment, began on Monday and will take place through March 22 under the theme of “accelerating the achievement of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls by addressing poverty and strengthening institutions and financing with a gender perspective.” This year’s session holds particular significance as global statistics reveal persistent gender disparities, with 10.3 percent of women living in extreme poverty and progress towards poverty eradication lagging significantly behind targets.

Accelerating progress towards gender equality necessitates substantial investment, with an estimated additional $360 billion per year needed to achieve key global goals. Stern while in New York sought to advocate for prioritizing policies and programs that address gender inequalities and enhance women’s agency and leadership, noting the transformative impact such investments could have on lifting millions out of poverty and spurring economic growth.

At CSW68, governments, civil society organizations, experts and activists will converge to discuss actions and investments aimed at ending women’s poverty and advancing gender equality. 

Moreover, the CSW68 serves as a critical platform for sharing best practices and innovative approaches to addressing gender disparities. Stern participated in panel discussions and workshops, offered insights gleaned from her extensive experience in advocating for the rights of LGBTQ+ people and marginalized communities.

**************************************************************************************

Amber Laenen is a senior at Thomas More Mechelen University in Belgium. She is majoring in journalism and international relations. Amber is interning with the Blade this semester as part of a continued partnership with the Washington Center.

Continue Reading

Popular