Ugandan law defends lesbians

Ugandan Justice Stella Arach yesterday issued a ruling in favour of LGBT activists in their suit against the Attorney General of Uganda.

The Uganda Hight Court ruling cited constitutional violations of the rights to privacy, property and the fundamental rights of women.

It was the first time a gay or lesbian person has brought the authorities to court.

"This is a profound ruling that will limit police intrusiveness into the private lives of human rights defenders," said Paula Ettelbrick, executive director at the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC).

In July 2005 the house of Victor Juliet Mukasa, of Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), was raided in the middle of the night by local government officials who seized documents and other material.

Another lesbian activist, Yvonne Oyoo, a Kenyan student who was in Ms Mukasa's house on the night of the raid, was arrested and detained by local government officials and then taken to a police station.

There she was stripped, supposedly in order to confirm she was a woman, and fondled and sexually harassed by police officers.

After the Ugandan government failed to investigate or take any action to remedy the wrongs that had occurred, Ms Mukasa and Ms Oyo filed a private suit against the Attorney General.

In yesterday's ruling, Justice Arach acknowledged that the government was not directly responsible for the actions of the local official, an elected town councilor, but nevertheless held the Attorney General's office responsible for the actions of the police.

Justice Arach cited the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention of the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and key human rights treaties that had been violated by the police's actions.

She ordered that Ms Oyoo and Ms Mukasa be paid £4,700 in damages.

"The most important role that police can play is to protect people," said Ms Mukasa.

"This judgement is a serious reminder to the Ugandan police that all Ugandans, including LGBT people, should be handled with respect and dignity."

In 2005 Uganda became the first country in the world to introduce laws banning same-sex marriage.

Section 140 of Uganda's penal code carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment for homosexual conduct, while Section 141 punishes 'attempts' at carnal knowledge with a maximum of seven years of imprisonment.

Section 143 punishes acts of "gross indecency" with up to five years in prison, while a sodomy conviction carries a penalty of 14 years to life imprisonment.

President of Uganda Kaguta Yoweri Museveni and other officials have spoken out against homosexuals on numerous occasions.

In June this year, Ugandan Bishop Luzinda said:

"I have been hearing that gays are demanding that the government should legalise their activities.

"This is absurd because God created a man and woman so that they can produce and fill this world.

"The government should not be tempted to legalise this backward culture which is bound to destroy this country.

"Not all that comes from Europe is superior and must be taken up by us," Bishop Luzinda said.

Mr Museveni spoke of his country's "rejection" of homosexuality during a speech he gave at the wedding of a former MP's daughter earlier this year.

He said the purpose of life was to create children and that homosexuality was a "negative foreign culture."

During his time in office LGBT Ugandans have been repeatedly threatened, harassed or attacked. Many have fled the country.

Source

IGHRC: Uganda: Victory for Human Rights

Training offered on issues faced by LGBT asylum seekers when claiming asylum

The UK Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group (UKLGIG) are providing training for people in the voluntary or private sector news who work with and support lesbian and gay asylum seekers.

Key topics include:

• What is sexuality?
• Issues faced by lesbian and gay asylum seekers in their home countries
• An overview of the asylum process
• Why are lesbian and gay asylum seekers refused asylum in the UK?
• What are the specific issues faced by lesbian and gay asylum seekers?
• The role of community groups in supporting lesbian and gay asylumseekers

Course costs:

Voluntary/Community - £49
Private - £99

A booking form is available on UKLGIG website or email admin at uklgig.org.uk

US asylum for Gay, HIV-Positive Ivoirian

NEW YORK (December 18, 2008) – Columbia Law School’s Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic yesterday secured asylum for a gay, HIV-positive man who feared persecution if forced to return to the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast) in West Africa. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued the grant of asylum.

“This case sheds light on the violence and abuse gay men and people living with HIV/AIDS face in Côte d’Ivoire,” said Professor Suzanne B. Goldberg, who directs the Clinic. The extensive documentation of the horrific conditions faced by gay and HIV-positive Ivoirians that the Clinic students compiled is now available for all gay or HIV-positive asylum-seekers from Côte d’Ivoire.

The asylee, age 32, arrived in the United States in January 2004. His application for asylum describes the personal violence and abuse he was subjected to because of his sexual orientation. He has been raped and beaten by military and militia members and was subjected to constant verbal and physical abuse by his neighbors, classmates and his own father. His application also describes the lack of protection offered him at home in Côte d’Ivoire, where police too participate in the persecution of gay people.

"I feel really happy and blessed that I was granted asylum, because I was not expecting it,” the asylee said. “I am so happy that I can stay in the U.S. and live a happy and healthy life.” He added, “I am so grateful for all of the hard work of the Clinic students, Professor Goldberg and Immigration Equality."

Since this past September, five students from Columbia’s Sexuality and Gender Clinic – Dana Kaufman ’09, Holly Chen ’09, Abbey Hudson ’09, Brad Mullins ’10 and Keren Zwick ’09 – have provided legal assistance to the asylee. Immigration Equality, a national organization focused on immigration rights for GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) individuals, referred this asylum-seeker to the Clinic and provided important assistance on the case.

“Our client’s personal story reveals the perilous conditions for gay men in Côte d’Ivoire who are beaten, sexually assaulted and rejected by the military, police, militias, civilians and even their own families,” said Chen.

The Clinic students spent several months conducting interviews, drafting affidavits, researching country conditions, reaching out to HIV experts and filling out necessary forms to complete the asylum application. The students also accompanied their client to the asylum office in Rosedale, New York, for his asylum interview, where Chen and Kaufman asked follow-up questions and made a closing presentation to the asylum officer after the client’s testimony.

“We are thankful that our client will finally be able to live openly as a gay man, safe from government-sponsored persecution, and that he will be able to access the life-saving HIV medications that he would not have been able to obtain in Côte d’Ivoire,” added Kaufman. “We hope that our client’s case will help combat the misperception that Côte d’Ivoire is a safe place for gay people, and will let other Ivoirians who were persecuted because of their sexual orientation know that they are not alone,” said Kaufman.

Goldberg said, “This experience – where students are responsible for working through the challenges of a case that makes a real-world difference in an emerging and important area of law – is what the Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic is all about.”

Reporters or producers wishing to schedule interviews can contact Public Affairs at 212-854-2650. Though the asylee must remain anonymous (as he continues to fear persecution of family members who still live in Côte d’Ivoire) he is available for interviews. Columbia Law School has a TV and radio studio on campus equipped with IFB and ISDN lines.

Columbia Law School’s Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic began in September 2006 and currently has nine students. Under Professor Goldberg’s guidance, students have worked on a wide range of projects, from constitutional litigation to legislative advocacy to immigration cases. Through the broad scope of its work, clinic students have had the opportunity to serve both individual and organizational clients, and they have devoted over 10,000 hours to cases involving issues of sexuality and gender law. For more information, please visit http://www.law.columbia.edu/focusareas/clinics/sexuality.

The Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic is part of Columbia Law School's Program in Gender and Sexuality Law. For more information on the Program: http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/gendersexualitylaw/.

Columbia Law School, founded in 1858, stands at the forefront of legal education and of the law in a global society. Columbia Law School joins traditional strengths in international and comparative law, constitutional law, administrative law, business law and human rights law with pioneering work in the areas of intellectual property, digital technology, sexuality and gender, criminal, and environmental law.

Urgent action request for gay Iranian in Malaysia

From IRQR

It is no secret that queer Iranians who flee to other countries continue to face risks due to homophobia. This often results in depression and post traumatic stress symptoms.

Ali fled Iran two years ago, but has still not received refugee status. The common complications that queer refugees experience are escalated for them because Ali is seriously depressed. Immediate attention by UNHCR is critical!

Please show your support by writing to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Kuala Lumpur to urge them to expedite the refugee process for Ali. There are two ways you can help:

1. You may copy and paste the sample letters in English into an email and send it to UNHCR; OR

2. You may write your own letter in support of Ali.

Send your letters to mlslu@unhcr.org and please cc IRQR info@irqr.net for tracking purposes.

Thank you for your support.

Ali's letter:

"My name is Ali, and I am gay. In 2006, I fled Iran to Malaysia after I experienced many problems in Iran. In Malaysia I sought help from the UNHCR – I never thought that I would have to wait so long to have my rights recognized. I was not even allowed to enter the building the first time I went there. For four months, I was at the door every day pleading for help. Finally, I was granted an appointment for an interview for several months after that. Until now, I have been to many interviews, and every time, I have never given a solid answer, I am always told to come back the following month. I have now been here more than 2 years. Malaysia is a Muslim country, and like many predominantly Muslim countries, life is difficult for people like me. I am kindly asking you for your help so that I can leave here as soon as possible, so that I can live in a place that is free. A place where gay people do not feel shame, and do not feel like they have to hide who they are, a place where I know that the law protects our rights, and will not discriminate between me and anyone else, a place where I will not be beaten because of my sexuality."

Sample Letter to UNHCR

To: mlslu@unhcr.org
CC: info@irqr.net
To United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees - Kuala Lumpur:

This letter particularly concerns the cases of Ali with file numbers 354-07C01854, respectively.

Ali completed his legal interview and is currently waiting for the commissioner's decision. We, as supporters of queer Iranians, urge the acceptance of his applications for refugee status, as there is every reason to suppose that his lives may depend upon it. We are concerned about his physical and emotional states in Malaysia, and urge you to bring him relief from the hard living conditions, which include unsanitary housing, lack of medical supplies and life expenses.

We realize you have many refugee applicants that you must respond to. However, due to the exigent circumstances especially facing queer refugees, we urge you to assist Ali, and grant him refugee status as soon as possible.

Your timely, informed and sensitive treatment of this case will be much appreciated.

Sincerely,

(Name)

The Sexual Cleansing of Iraq

Part One. Queer Fear 2 - the sequel to 2007's Queer Fear: Gay Life, Gay Death in Iraq. In Iraq the killings continue. LGBT people are being murdered by Shia death squads, now increasingly integrated into the forces of the Iraqi state. Amd encouraged by leading Shia clerics. Meanwhile the democratically-elected government denies there is a problem.



Part Two. What is being done to protect LGBT people in Iraq from the death squads. How you can help provide safe houses and save lives.



Please support Iraqi-LGBT

The immediate urgent priority is to Support and Donate Money to LGBT activists in Iraq in order to assist their efforts to communicate information about the wave of homophobic murders in Iraq to the outside world.

Funds raised will also help provide LGBTs under threat of honour killing with refuge in the safer parts of Iraq (including safe houses and food), and assist efforts help them seek asylum abroad. Donations to Iraqi LGBT are not tax-deductible for income tax purposes.

A strange sympathy

Rhetoric about victims of Mugabe sits ill with the reality we Zimbabweans seeking asylum find here

By Yeukai Taruvinga

When I tell ordinary British people that I came to this country from Zimbabwe to seek asylum because of Robert Mugabe's government, they are always sympathetic. They see the humanitarian crisis, the old people and children dying of cholera - the UN reported yesterday that there were more than a thousand dead and another 20,000 sufferers. They see on the news night after night what Mugabe is doing to my country. And they see the continuing human rights crisis and how he treats those who oppose him.

Hopes were raised when Mugabe agreed to a power-sharing government with the leader of the Movement for Democratic Change, Morgan Tsvangirai. But it is evident that human rights are still not being respected. In the last two weeks prominent human rights defenders have been abducted by groups suspected of having government links. These include Jestina Mukoko, the director of the Zimbabwe Peace Project, who has not been seen since she was taken from her home on 3 December.

British politicians have expressed great sympathy towards Zimbabweans. Just last week Gordon Brown said that "we must stand together to defend human rights and democracy, to say firmly to Mugabe that enough is enough", and that it was "our duty" to support the aspirations of the Zimbabwean people. David Cameron has described Zimbabwe as the most important issue in the world today and has pressed for wider sanctions and a rescue package for the Zimbabwean people. And David Miliband has said that, "Zimbabwe's crisis is one that the world has a responsibility to respond to."

It is good to hear all this, but how does it translate into action? It is easy to condemn a government from afar. But if politicians really believe that Mugabe is illegitimate, that his repression of his own people is the most important issue in the world today, why do they behave as they do to his victims?

I got involved in supporting the opposition party when I was a student. Like many MDC supporters, I was beaten up by Mugabe's Zanu-PF thugs when I went to meetings and rallies. When they wrote threats on the walls of my family's house, my mother decided that I should leave the country.

I believed that I would be safe when I came here seven years ago, at the age of 18. When I stepped foot on English soil and claimed asylum, I did not realise that I was in for a long battle. I have been detained - imprisoned - for two and a half months, simply because I claimed asylum. I have been moved between three different detention centres, and taken without notice from Colnbrook at Heathrow, to Yarl's Wood in Bedford to Dungavel in Scotland.

You feel extremely helpless in such places: it is almost impossible to stay in touch with friends or your lawyer, and you believe that anything could happen to you and nobody would know about it. Although suspected terrorists cannot be held without trial for more than 28 days, I was locked up for more than 60 days. In Dungavel at that time there were only half a dozen women and hundreds of foreign criminals awaiting deportation. It was terrifying just to walk around the centre.

It seems to me that political leaders are reluctant to do anything to help those who make their way here. Last week Jacqui Smith said that the government's priority was to ensure that Zimbabwean refugees did not use false passports in order to get to this country. She did not say that refugees should find a fair system when they arrive.

I am still not safe. I have not been given refugee status. After my release from detention I was not allowed benefits nor allowed to work. This is the government's policy of destitution; if you have failed in your asylum claim, then you are forced to live without support. I rely on handouts and gifts from churches and friends, even for the bed I sleep in and the soap I wash with. Most of the people who help me are asylum seekers or refugees themselves, because they understand what it's like.

It is humiliating: not only can I not work, but I cannot study or learn. I am worried about the impact this is going to have on my future. I want to study and work, so that when Mugabe is toppled I and my fellow activists can be the backbone of the new country that will arise from the ashes. But all avenues are blocked to me to grow and give back to society. It is strange that this country, which expresses such sympathy for Zimbabwe's people, condemns its refugees to this kind of life - which is no life at all.

• Yeukai Taruvinga is not allowed to work; the fee for this article has been donated to Women Asylum Seekers Together in London, which she chairs

Source

• refugeewomen.com

A lone voice?

Comment by NoBorders South Wales

While the image of Britain as a tolerant country that welcomed migrants is a debatable one, if you read the right-wing press you might be forgiven for thinking that any welcome that did exist had disappeared altogether, and in terms of its migration regime it most definitely has. Despite increasingly draconian laws however, there are still many people who believe that somehow the UK Border regime is too tolerant and needs to ‘toughen up’. Take Paul Goddard over on The Lone Voice blog, who recently commented on Babi Badalov’s deportation:

“it is rather satisfying to see that the Immigration Agency actually do throw people out when they find their cases wanting.”

We are sad to say that the UK Border Agency (do try to keep up Paul!) carry out around 180 deportations every day - that’s a person every 8 minutes - with these often being to countries which the government knows are unsafe. Some contributors to “a lone voice” seem fully aware of the dangers people are deported into, commenting:

“Lets hope he gets killed asap back in his homeland.”

and from another

“If Babi faces execution … will the video be available on You Tube?”

Professor David Coleman

It’s quite common for advocates of “stronger borders” to be revealed as nothing more than racial supremacists. MigrationWatch, for example, possibly the foremost anti-immigration organisation in the UK was founded and is still partly run by Professor David Coleman, a long-term member and sometime office-holder of the Eugenics Society and its successor the Galton Institute (sneaky name change due to the highly discredited theory being widely recognised for the racist nonsense that it is!). Amongst other things he thinks Ethiopians should have fewer babies, and Europeans more. In a similar way MigrationWatch chairman, Sir Andrew Green, has publicly stated that

“We have no problem with immigration from Poland, which is valuable to all sides.”

but has great concerns about people from

“the distant cultures of Asia and Africa”

Sir Andrew Green

To these “balanced migration” advocates, Europeans = good, Asians and Africans = bad. Whitey is welcome, darkie has got to keep out. These outspoken voices often bemoan being labelled as racist for their views, claiming to represent mainstream opinion, or the ’silent majority’.

Our experiences as No Borders activists paints a very different picture. Even though we hold what those in government, sundry influential right-wing nuts, and their apologists in the tabloid press might consider an ‘extreme position’ on borders and migration, we have found our views usually go down pretty well with the people we meet.

We do a lot of campaigning ‘on the street’, putting our message out there and making the case for the abolition of borders and in favour of individual migrants’ campaigns to stay. And far from continually meeting with abuse from knuckle-dragging racists we’ve found that once we make our case, and explain the human stories which lie behind the faceless (and dubious) statistics trotted out by the likes of Migrationwatch, people are usually quite quick to express support for what we do.

For too long now we have allowed popular discussion of migration issues to be dominated by the unthinking right and their allies on both sides of the mainstream political spectrum: a big part of our job now has to be to get out there and put our ideas in the public domain. We have to speak to our friends, our neighbours, and those in our communities; we need to produce our own media and sometimes engage with the corporate press. If our experiences since setting up this No Borders group are anything to go by, we’ll find more support amongst the general public than the shrill and callous ranting of a lone voice might suggest.

National day of action to stop deportations

No Borders Wales have called for national support in their monthly day of action against BMI airlines, who are one of the airlines involved in forced deportations.

On the 20th of every month, a day of action against BMI Airlines takes place. Saturday 20th December will be the 3rd day of action of this campaign.

Everyday, an average of 180 migrants are deported from the UK. That’s one person every eight minutes.

These people haven’t done anything wrong. They are criminalised for doing what humans have done for thousands of years: moving in search of a better life. Moving to escape war, persecution, torture, physical abuse, poverty…

Governments across the world do not want us to see those being deported as people. They want to shroud them under statistics and treat them as pieces of meat.

Airline companies are a key link in the deportation industry. Without them it would be impossible for the state to implement this aspect of the migration regime and there can be no migration controls without
deportations.

People being deported are often handcuffed on the flight and there have been numerous reports of physical assaults on people being deported by the security personnel who escort them.

We once again call on all those who oppose the deportation industry and the inhumane treatment of migrants who are subjected to the wider regime of control that it forms an integral part of, to contact BMI and let them know what you think of their profiteering from this cruel practice.

A full list of contact details can be found here (PDF).

Being a Saturday, we suggest that callers focus on phoning the Reservations & General Enquiries numbers: 01332 854854; 01332 648181 and the BMI baby Reservations, 01332 648181.

Report of a recent action at Cardiff’s Winter Wonderland an event sponsored by Bmi baby, a subsidiary company of BMI Airlines.

Previous call out

LGBT and HIV Asylum and Refugee Claims: Increasing Protection Under a New American Administration

Heartland Alliance and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), will host, "LGBT and HIV Asylum and Refugee Claims: Increasing Protection Under a New Administration " in Chicago, Illinois from March 26-27, 2009.

The conference will bring together policy advocates and legal professionals working with LGBT and HIV-positive asylum seekers to share knowledge, expertise, and strategies for reforming United States protection of these individuals from harm in their original countries.

Legal professionals will share and refine best practices for representing LGBT asylum seekers and will create and deepen networks for sharing documentation related to these claims. This legal expertise will inform a discussion and prioritization of administrative and legal reforms within the new administration and Congress, and a coordinated plan to achieve these reforms.

In addition, Heartland Alliance will be hosting foreign LGBT advocacy groups at a simultaneous meeting, and attendees will be able to meet and work with these groups during shared networking functions.

For further information, please contact Eric Berndt, supervisor of Heartland Alliance and NIJC's National Asylum Partnership on Sexual Minorities, a project dedicated to obtaining asylum and other protection for LGBT and HIV-positive immigrants, at berndt@heartlandalliance.org or by phone at (312) 660-1364.

Putting the World to Rights

Except from a speech by LibDem leader Nick Clegg on the 60 anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

All of us have had our rights have come under attack…
But no one has suffered more so than foreigners in this country.

Britain is fast developing a two-tier rights regime.
That’s why foreign nationals are the first of us to be forced to carry ID cards.
It’s why asylum seekers are left hanging around for years by the incompetence of the Home Office…

Driven into the black economy when they could work and pay taxes to support themselves… Rather than depend on taxpayers for meagre handouts.
And it’s why countless economic migrants are exploited by unscrupulous employers.

When you begin to list these abuses the picture it creates is truly horrendous.
When you think of the Zimbabweans who are being imprisoned in immigration detention centres even though they can’t be deported.
Or the women who come to the UK legally and find themselves in violent marriages but who aren’t eligible for places in refuges.
Again an issue that Amnesty have been campaigning heavily on.

And when you recognise the astonishing brutality and cruelty that has become a part of our asylum system.
And the attempts by our Government to deport terror suspects to countries where they face torture.

Mehdi Kazemi is an Iranian the Government tried to deport earlier this year…
Despite the fact that he is homosexual and his partner had already been killed for being gay.
The Home Office said he would be alright if he was ‘discreet’.
Their exact words

If our own Government is capable of degrading so many foreigners in Britain, is it any wonder that communities have become more fragmented, tensions exacerbated?

We have already seen the Immigration Minister swerving to the right in preparation for the next election…
Peddling fear and scapegoating asylum seekers for Britain’s ills.
What does this Government think is going to happen to the already delicate ethnic tensions as we spiral further into economic downturn?
When more jobs go, and frustrations are at a high?
Why are they stoking this fire?

What makes it even worse is that this is an area where the Conservatives simply won’t be outflanked.
My concern is that this marks the start of a kind of downward bidding…
A “we’ll let in fewer than you will” head to head.
We can’t let this happen.

We need a responsible, mature debate on immigration.
Where we recognise it is right to be tough on illegal immigration…
But equally the huge contribution that legal immigrants make.

We need to bridge the gap between the treatment of foreigners and the treatment of everyone else.
I am a liberal because I believe deeply in the universality of basic human rights.
Wherever their application is discriminate…
Contingent on arbitrary factors like creed or colour…
It must stop.

Second gay Nigerian leader granted asylum in UK

By The Reverend Colin Coward Director of Changing Attitude England

Stephen Wariebi Hobobo, co-leader of the Changing Attitude Nigeria (CAN) group in Port Harcourt, has been granted asylum in the UK. Stephen applied for asylum in May 2008 having arrived in the UK in April.

He travelled to the UK following the violent assault on his life which occurred in Port Harcourt on Maundy Thursday 20 March 2008. He was savagely beaten in an attack outside the compound where the funeral ceremony for the sister of Davis Mac-Iyalla was taking place.

Stephen went into hiding and flew to the UK in early April, still having a valid visa from his previous visit in November 2007 when he addressed a National Union of Students Conference.

Having made contact with Changing Attitude leaders here and consulted with them about his safety and future in Nigeria, he applied for asylum in the UK. In September he was notified that his application had been refused. He appeal against the refusal was heard on 20 November in London. His solicitor informed him that his appeal had been successful on 4 December.

In granting asylum to Davis Mac-Iyalla and Stephen Wariebi Hobobo, the UK Government has recognised that lesbian and gay Christian leaders in Nigeria are under serious threat to their lives when their status and activity enters the public realm.

Davis Mac-Iyalla entered the public realm from the founding of Changing Attitude Nigeria in August 2005, gaining publicity in the national Nigerian press for the first General Meeting held in Abuja. The leaders of the nine other Changing Attitude groups in Nigeria have carefully protected themselves by maintaining a low profile.

Colin Coward and Stephen Coles met many of the leaders at the meeting in Togo in May 2007. A photograph of those present was posted on the CA web site with the faces of all but Davis Mac-Iyalla and the two English priests present pixellated to protect their identities. One of those is Stephen Wariebi.

The General Meeting held in November 2005 and the leaders' meeting in Togo both attracted international attention in the Anglican Communion. Reports were posted on the Changing Attitude web site and the events received attention in Abuja where the headquarters of the Church of Nigeria are located. Reports from contacts inside the Church office confirmed this.

Stephen's invisibility was compromised in 2007 when the CAN group in Port Harcourt developed a relationship with an orphanage as part of their group ministry and pastoral work. On Sunday 17 June 2007, 48 lesbians and gay men held a party for the children of the Orphanage Home, Borokiri, Port Harcourt, Rivers State. A report of the party was posted on the Changing Attitude web site on 19 June 2007 which included a picture of Stephen.

We posted the report and pictures of the Port Harcourt orphanage event on the web site and named people because we wanted to prove that lesbian and gay Christians in Nigeria are not only concerned with their own campaign but are actively demonstrating Christian witness to others.

Stephen was able to join Davis Mac-Iyalla and two other leaders of Changing Attitude Nigeria as part of our team at the Lambeth Conference in July/August. Although the other two leaders participated in public events in Canterbury, we have been careful to protect their identities since both have returned to continue their work in Nigeria.

Changing Attitude has tried to maintain a fine balance between protecting lesbian and gay group members in Nigeria and providing information to the public to demonstrate the reality of lesbian and gay activity and experience.

Davis Mac-Iyalla has been the public face for LGBT members of Changing Attitude Nigeria. Our inability to name individuals and publish pictures of Changing Attitude activity in Nigeria enables those opposed to us to claim that none of these things happen in reality. It is a difficult to raise the profile of LGBT people and protect them from attack at the same time.

Leaders and members of other Changing Attitude groups have had to go into hiding to avoid being threatened and attacked. A member of the group in Benin City was shot in his arm by members of a cult gang who were pursuing him because he was identified as gay.

The group leader in Benin City was threatened in many phone calls by members of a cult gang. He was attacked, his wallet and identity card stolen and was threatened with exposure as gay.

He went underground for safety until he was advised that it was safe to return home. Almost every member of the Benin City group reports stories of being attacked because they are gay.

In granting asylum because of their sexuality to Davis and Stephen, the UK Government accepts that Nigeria is now too dangerous as a country for any LGBT person who is actively and publicly visible. The recent public outcry against the Revd Jide Rowland Macaulay of the House of Rainbow MCC Church in Lagos, reinforces the UK Government policy. Jide was forced to return to the UK for his own safety.

Archbishop Peter Akinola said in an interview in the Nigerian Sunday Tribune published on 7 December 2008 that: "Again, we have never said that homosexuals are to be found only in England or America . They are to be found everywhere in the world. They are in America, they are in England, they are in Nigeria, Uganda, Arabia, they are in Kuwait, they are everywhere in the world."

This is very different from the stance previously maintained by Nigerian Primates and bishops, that homosexuality is not known in Nigeria but has somehow been imported from the west.

The Archbishop also claims, in accordance with his tradition, that: "Our culture abhors [homosexuality], the order of creation abhors it. The word of God says no to it and therefore we chose not to celebrate it. In our culture, you see two men say they are homosexuals how do you relate to them, we know it is an aberration and we have always said it is an aberration..."

It is the attitude of abhorrence, aberration and judgement expressed by the Archbishop that fuels prejudice against LGBT people in Nigeria when the law is already punitive and social and religious attitudes are hostile.

He said that: "… people who suffer from this problem can always come to the church for counselling, for prayers. I tell you this, many have been delivered from this problem in America, England. But if they are so shy and they cannot come out to say this is our problem then, what do we do. But we cannot accept them. So, that they are in Nigeria doesn't bother me. If any of them comes for help, we would help, but if they don't come for help, they are answerable to their God who created them."

The LGBT members of CAN do not believe that they can safely come out and reveal themselves to their priests, let alone their congregations. They fear that their own priest will not offer them counselling and prayers but will react negatively to them.

The problem they would bring to their priest is in any case not the problem of their homosexuality, but the problem the church has with homosexuality. They do not want to come to church for help to be changed or healed.

LGBT people know, as Archbishop Akinola does not or possibly cannot know as a heterosexual man, that we do not need healing from our innate, God-given sexual identity. We long for the church to learn "… what it is that the Lord requires of you: only to act justly, to love loyalty, to walk humbly with your God." Micah 6.8

UKLGIG wins Community Group of the Year award

The UK Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group (UKLGIG) has won the the Stonewall & Barclays Community Group of the Year Award.

UKLGIG was founded in 1993 to assist same‑sex, bi‑national couples win the right for foreign partners to remain in the United Kingdom on the basis of their relationship. The work of the group resulted in the first ever legislation in this country giving rights to lesbians and gay men.

From 1997 the group achieved increasing steps towards equality and with many of its recommendations being included in the Civil Partnership Act, immigration equality for same‑sex partners was finally achieved in December 2005.

Since 2004 UKLGIG has shifted its focus towards the problems faced by lesbian and gay asylum seekers. Every day, the group receives calls for help from lesbians and gay men seeking the protection of the UK, because they are persecuted in their home country.

There is currently very little support available for them and the group’s asylum work is a vital lifeline - a place to meet others struggling with similar issues, a source of quality legal advice, of support and importantly of hope.

UKLGIG said:

After fighting for over 10 years for the immigration rights of same sex bi-national couples to achieve equality our work now focuses on helping lesbians and gay men who face persecution in their home countries just because of their sexual orientation. Since the asylum work started in 2004 we have supported hundreds of lesbians and gay men who have come to the UK from more than 40 countries including Cameroon, Jamaica and Iran to seek asylum.

This award comes as recognition of the work that we do in supporting lesbian and gay asylum seekers but also as a sign that the lesbian and gay community in the UK is not indifferent to the issues that they face.

UK Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group is honoured to have received this prestigious award and very grateful to Stonewall supporters who voted for us and to Barclays for their generosity.

Lord Avebury nominated for gay asylum work

The LibDem peer Lord Avebury was nominated by UK Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group for the Charity Champions awards 2008. He lost but his work is worth homouring and noting.

Nomination by UKLGIG.

We nominate Lord Avebury for his outstanding work in tackling social injustice in relation to immigration. His energy is equally, and strongly, spread across many significant issues – however politically appealing or isolating they may be. It is impossible to do justice to his year’s contribution and achievements in a short paragraph.

On behalf of lesbian and gay asylum seekers, who our group assists, he has been tireless in raising awareness of the perverse situation whereby countries in which gay men and lesbians are known to be persecuted are nonetheless deemed ‘safe’ by the Home Office. On wider immigration issues, he led a great deal of the UK Borders Bill, for example, the automatic deportation provisions would have received little scrutiny without him.

On the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, he was one of the few, if not the only one, to raise concerns about 'Special Immigration Status', which places asylum seekers who are not protected by the Refugee Convention but can't be returned to their countries of origin, in permanent limbo and destitution.

He was instrumental in retaining discretion with regards to the HC321 (automatic bans); and played a major role in achieving concessions with regards to: the Immigration and Nationality (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2008; the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 (Duty to Share Information and Disclosure of Information for Security Purposes) Order 2008; and Immigration (Biometric Registration) Regulations 2008.

He has been consistently vocal on welfare of children and detainees.

Cyprus grants asylum to gay Iranian

MEPs have welcomed the decision of Cyprus interior minister to grant resident status to an gay Iranian asylum seeker.

Labour's Michael Cashman, Lib Dem Baroness Ludford, Tory John Bowis and Greens Jean Lambert and Caroline Lucas were among 13 MEPs who put their name to a parliamentary question to the European Commission on the issue.

They wanted to know if the refusal of asylum to Abbas Bagherian by Cyprus on the grounds of sexual orientation was a breach of EU directives.

After Cypriot MEP Panayiotis Demetriou raised the case in discussions with the interior minister, Mr Bagherian was granted residency.

"I strongly welcome the decision to allow Mr Bagherian to remain in Cyprus," said Baroness Ludford, Liberal Democrat justice and human rights spokeswoman and an MEP for London.

"A rejection of his application and his return to Iran would have left him vulnerable to imprisonment, torture and in the worst case the death penalty, simply for being gay.

"I hope that we are starting to see a general move in EU countries to recognise the validity of asylum claims based on the risk of persecution due to sexual orientation.

"There should be a consistent EU policy, because such fears may be absolutely justified regarding a country like Iran."

According to Doros Polykarpou, the director the Cypriot immigrant support group KISA, Mr Bagherian came to Cyprus and applied for asylum in June 2004 and for the last three years he has been living with his Cypriot partner.

Mr Bagherian had an initial interview at the Asylum Service in July 2005. At the interview, he was did not reveal that the real cause of his persecution in Iran was his sexual orientation. This was because he was afraid that this information would have been leaked to the Iranian authorities and, in case of a rejection of his application, he would face imprisonment, torture or even death sentence if he was returned to Iran.

Then in April 2007, he informed the Asylum Service of his sexuality and had another interview, saying he was arrested and detained at the age of 15 because of his homosexual relations.

In addition, Mr Bagherian informed the Asylum Service that he had been arrested a further four times by the authorities in Iran and had detained and beaten up.

Source Source

Asylum changes in the draft Immigration and Citizenship Bill

Points taken from "Immigration monster unleashed" by Emma Ginn for the IRR.

A project to replace the mess of immigration legislation by a 'simplified, clear and coherent legal framework' to control borders, manage migration and 'reform the path to citizenship' was announced in the Queen's Speech at the opening of the 2008-9 parliamentary session. A partial draft of the Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Bill was published for consultation in July 2008, and forms the basis of the legislation.

The draft Bill brings together in one place provisions on permission to enter and stay in the UK, and expulsion; criteria for naturalisation as a British citizen; powers of examination and detention; immigration offences; carriers' liability; employers' liability for undocumented workers; and provision for appeals.

So far, there are 214 clauses and three schedules, and dozens of regulation-making powers which will provide the detail - and important topics such as immigration officers' powers of search and seizure, data sharing, biometric registration, asylum support, and the system of appeal and review of immigration decisions (other than first-instance appeals) remain to be covered. When it is complete, the Bill is set to be a monster.

A monster in more ways than one. In the course of 'simplification', rights are lost, and the powers of immigration police, and the scope for criminalisation of those crossing their path, enhanced.

Removing higher appeal right

Another issue flagged up by immigration minister Phil Woolas is the removal of rights of appeal beyond the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, a deeply controversial issue.

An earlier attempt to remove higher court appeal and review rights in 2004 was defeated when Law Lords voiced their opposition. A consultation paper, 'Immigration Appeals', published in August, once again seeks to remove or severely restrict higher court scrutiny, this time by transferring judicial review powers to the upper tier of the Tribunal, while severely limiting recourse to the Court of Appeal.

The proposal has already provoked strong opposition on constitutional grounds and in the name of access to justice, and if it is included in the draft Bill, there will be strong resistance.

Other objectionable features of the draft legislation, not referred to in the Queen's Speech, include:

• New powers for immigration officers to stop people in the street and demand to see proof of entitlement to be here;
• New powers for immigration officers (or 'Border Agency officials') to examine passengers leaving the country to ascertain whether they have committed any immigration offences in the UK, and if so, to stop them coming back;
• Still no statutory limitation on the length of immigration detention;
• No limitation of the power to detain children, even though for the first time the Bill contains a duty to have regard to the welfare of children when exercising immigration functions;
• Commonwealth citizens with the right of abode will lose it and be given 'immigration permission' (IP) instead. This leaves them open to the possibility of expulsion;
• The exemption from deportation of certain long-resident Commonwealth citizens has gone;
• The merging of deportation and administrative removal means that breach of any of these conditions can lead to expulsion for an unlimited period (with no right of appeal) as well as to criminal prosecution;
• Anyone assaulting, obstructing or resisting anyone exercising functions under the Act commits a criminal offence - a new level of criminalisation;
• New statutory limitations mean that the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal will no longer have the power to allow appeals if they think the Home Office decision is too harsh, if the decision was correct as a matter of law.

An Iranian Queer Asylum Seeker's life in England

By IRQR

Translated by Ava

At 2 am on Saturday 15th November, Saeed attempted suicide by swallowing many pills. He was taken to the emergency room at the hospital. He was in critical condition and in a coma.

Due to his comatose state the doctor did not wash out his stomach. They could not give him a vomit-inducing agent because of the potential danger. The deep coma could prevent him from vomiting. Since he had overdosed and the amount of pills he had taken was so large they did not want to take any risks.

They transferred Saeed to ICU so he could be placed in intensive care. They attached an oxygen mask to him until Sunday morning close to noontime when he gained consciousness. The risk of side effects to the kidney and lungs was high so they kept him under treatment and monitoring. He was given antibiotics to prevent infection.

Later in the day they transferred him to a different section where his medical treatment continued and he was placed under supervision of the mental health team to make sure he would not try to escape.

Around 5 in the evening the mental health team came to see him and after speaking to him decided to transfer him temporarily to the Mental Health Hospital so he could be watched over incase he made another attempt at taking his life. On Friday he was transferred to the Mental Health Hospital where he resides at the moment and is under surveillance.

At this point I should mention that in the past few months Saeed has been under intense emotional stress. He was dealing with the uncertainty of his refugee application and being ignored by Home Office. On the other hand he didn’t have a work permit and received little money from *social office*.

He applied multiple times for a driver’s license and was refused because he did not have a passport or visa. He had a difficult time in the house he had been given, as his housemates would ridicule and belittle him because of his sexuality. This caused him to complain repeatedly to the office that supported him but they did nothing. (Paolo is aware of this situation)

Let me remind you of the background details of Saeed’s situation in case you don’t remember.

In 1999 when Saeed was 36 years old, due to his homosexuality and the problems it created for him in Iran, he fled Iran and went to the UK where he applied for refugee status. But his claim was ignored until in 2003 they rejected his appeal in court without granting him a lawyer, cut all his support, and gave him a deportation order.

Numerous lawyers refused to take on his case until it gained some attention and was picked up again and pursued until, as you know, in 2006 Home Office arrested him and took him to a detention centre in Oxford. He was there for 10 days.

With much support including those of IRQR and other friends they released him but without providing any support or work permit. They also demanded that once a week he goes to London to sign documents attesting to his presence.

A few weeks later, after he had requested that they space out the times he was required to provide a signature, Home Office sent Saeed a letter informing him that during the appointment they have given him officers will be going to his home and tagging his feet. (This is a police foot tag with radar and security alarm, which goes off if the person wearing it walks beyond the geographic limits legally assigned to him. If home office wants to arrest that person they locate him through the radar and publically embarrass him by turning his alarm on.)

Saeed was suffering from extreme skin allergies, which his doctor assigns to a reaction to metal, or any other potential allergenic triggered by the emotional and psychological pressures he is dealing with. Saeed’s doctor sent a letter to Saeed’s lawyer and to Home Office, preventing them from attaching the tag on Saeed’s foot.

After a long time of being homeless and sleeping on the street Saeed received some financial support and was given a place to stay. His housemates made his stay there unbearable.

Moreover, ever since Saeed’s release from detention centre right up till this very day, every letter his lawyer has sent to Home Office has gone unanswered. Home Office does not respond at all and their dismissal of Saeed is very hard on him.

All these pressures and the toll of not seeing his family for 9 years caused him to try and end his life.

I visit him every day but he is not emotionally stable and says he does not want to live anymore. He doesn’t regret his attempted suicide and is likely to try again at any moment if he finds an opportunity.

This is why they have taken him to the Mental Health Hospital so they can control him and protect him so he will not have personal freedom and access to things he could use for suicide.

Minister clashes with Bishop over UK asylum

The Archbishop of York has criticised "unmerciful" immigration policies and outspoken minister Phil Woolas.

Dr John Sentamu said recent comments by Mr Woolas that many lawyers for asylum applicants undermined the system and did "more harm than good" were wrong. He said asylum applicants, particularly those from Zimbabwe, should be shown more mercy and compassion.

Mr Woolas has been the subject of regular controversy since becoming immigration minister in October.

In an interview soon after his appointment, he appeared to support a cap on immigration by backing a future limit on the UK population of about 70 million. Soon afterwards, he seemed to attack the government's managed migration policy, saying the failure to fund asylum removals properly had caused "untold human misery and division".

Most recently, in an interview with the Guardian, Mr Woolas argued that most asylum seekers were economic migrants and criticised lawyers for "playing the system" when it came to the asylum appeals process and sowing "false hope" in clients' minds.

In the same interview, Mr Woolas said immigration was good for the UK but called for a "mature debate" on immigration levels which addressed public concerns on the subject.

In a speech to the Royal Society, Dr Sentumu said the minister's recent remarks had muddied the waters in the immigration debate.

"For any honourable member to suggest that someone who has made out reasonable grounds, and has succeeded in their appeal under the due process of law 'has no right to be in this country' is a worrying development," Dr Sentamu said.

"May I be forgiven for suggesting that the honourable member in question does not advance his stated desire to have 'a mature debate about immigration' by this carry on?"

Lawyers acting on behalf of asylum applicants should not be castigated for pursuing appeals, he said, given the large number of initial decisions refusing asylum which were subsequently overturned. Claims that some lawyers were dragging out appeals to prolong the amount of time their clients could stay in the country, and thus undermining the legal process, were simply not borne out by the facts.

He said government policy on immigration and asylum should show more compassion adding:

"It is the tough talking of the unmerciful who would come down hard on criminals, immigrants and troublemakers…in the belief that this is the way to win hearts and minds".

He said asylum applications from those seeking to escape Zimbabwe's "brutal" government must be handled much more quickly. He said it was "appalling" that applicants were not allowed to work while their applications were processed.

"The quality of our mercy in this area as a society has shown to be lacking," he said.

Artist on the run

From The St. Petersburg Times

Artist and poet Babi Badalov feels that his life is threatened both in his home country Azerbaijan and in Russia because of his politically conscious art and because he is openly gay. Growing nationalism and increasing attacks on people from the former Soviet republics also means that Russia is not entirely safe for someone from Azerbaijan. Badalov thought he had found a new home in Cardiff, Wales, where he had been based since December 2006, but earlier this year the U.K.’s interior ministry denied his application for political asylum.

“[In Britain] I mixed with many people who applied for asylum — Afghans, Iranians, Somalis, people from all over the world. We went to the Refugee Council together, lived at the hotel together. There is such a word used there — ‘chance,’” Badalov said during a recent phone interview.

“You never know what will happen, everybody says it’s all up to ‘chance,’ that it’s a ‘lottery.’ You can have a solid case and still be denied asylum. Some other person can come [to the U.K.] just for the hell of it and receive [asylum].”

Badalov, who was one of the best-known artists in the St. Petersburg independent art scene centered at the Pushkinskaya 10 art squat in the 1990s, recently spent several weeks in the city, en route to Western Europe from Baku, Azerbaijan. While in town, he opened an exhibition of his work called “The Persian Ambassador,” which runs through December 28.

Deported to Azerbaijan from the U.K. on Sept. 20, despite a massive campaign in his defense launched by friends and supporters both in the U.K. and abroad, Badalov had to live covertly in Baku for two days, hiding from brothers who are angered by his homosexuality. His sister had warned him over the phone never to come to the country again.

“It’s not just my relatives. My whole small town is aghast that such a ‘faggot’ comes from our village,” he said.

“I can’t tell you how horrible it is. If I die and there’s a funeral, nobody will come: the mullah won’t come, nobody will read the Koran. [The body of a gay man] is a dirty, foul body. It cannot be touched; it cannot be washed. It must be thrown into a pit, because it’s so shameful. This attitude still exists there.”

Sending Badalov to Azerbaijan was also a danger to him as he is known for works criticizing the country’s authoritarian rulers.

“Azerbaijan is one of many countries that wants to be a member of the European Parliament. It wants to be an imitation of Europe, like Russia does, but in reality everything is rotting there, worse than it was in the Soviet Union,” he said.

“I tried to exhibit my work called ‘Mister Musor’ [Mr. Garbage] a few times, where I am standing on a heap of garbage in Lenin’s pose.

“When the Azeri President died, they put his monuments everywhere — on every central street, on every central square — giant, hi-tech posters are everywhere, posters of Heydar Aliyev. The main street in every village is named after Heydar Aliyev, while all the rest are rotting. You walk ten meters [away from the main street] and it’s all sores. People live in shit, eat bones, die of hunger. But when [current President Ilham Aliyev] visits, there’s a monument to his father, and everything is fine. Lenin has been resurrected.”

After two days in hiding in Baku, where he slept in an art gallery, Badalov flew to St. Petersburg on a plane ticket bought over the Internet by a friend in London.

Born in 1959 in Lerik, an Azeri village near the Iranian border, Badalov came to Leningrad (St. Petersburg) in 1980, after serving two years in the Soviet Army.

“As we all knew in Soviet times, St. Petersburg was the cultural capital. So, as a person interested in everything that is new, I decided to go to Petersburg, as many did, to be closer to the modern, progressive world,” he said.

“There I met nonconformist artists and went to their gatherings. But it was scary: I worked as a night guard, as a concrete worker; I had a limitnaya propiska (a limited residence permit) and lived in a creepy workers’ hostel.”

But Badalov recalls the early ‘90s in Petersburg with affection.

“When Russia opened up and the Soviet Union broke down, we became interesting,” he said.

“It was a golden time. There was a need for contemporary art. Western artists started to come, and it became easier to hold exhibitions. That is why my works began to sell, and it became much easier for me as an artist; I had money, a studio, contacts.”

This soon changed, as St. Petersburg became Russia’s “criminal capital.”

“These ‘New Russians’ emerged; it became scary to go out on the street. I got scared and ran from Russia,” said Badalov.

Badalov first moved to Turkey, but could not put down roots there. He then moved back to Azerbaijan, where his life soon became intolerable.

“I was forced to get married and live behind the mask required by my parents and relatives,” he said.

“It was a creepy time. I acted like an actor, always playing some role, controlling myself.”
In 2006, he was invited to do a workshop as part of an international art program for two weeks in Oxford. With a British visa already in hand, he later decided to move to the U.K. for good.

While he is fond of his Russian friends and the Russian language, the country is not mutually welcoming to Badalov. He said he received threats from unknown men in the street, who told him that he should leave.

“I criticized the Russian authorities in some of my poems,” said Badalov, who wrote a poem about Anna Politkovskaya, the Novaya Gazeta journalist and persistent critic of the Kremlin’s politics who was shot to death in Moscow in 2006.

“I read it in Italy; it mentioned Putin and Anna Politkovskaya. I have some other provocative poems, so I am simply afraid to stay in Russia. It’s scary there. Even though I love Russian culture and my best friends live there.

“I was visiting a friend [in Petersburg], and I was horrified when I walked back home. In the West, it is just the opposite; I like to walk at nights there, rather than in the daytime.”

Thomas Campbell, the exhibition’s curator, described Babi as an “iconic figure” for the St. Petersburg alternative art scene for his vision, incredible productivity, and willingness to join other artists’ projects.

Babi Badalov’s blog

In Memorial of Makvan, who was Executed in Iran

By Iranian Queer Railroad

Last year in Iran on December 5, 2007 Makvan Mouloodzadeh 21-years old was executed. Homophobia runs deep into Iranian society.

This, of course, partly reflects the influence of the conservative Islamic legal and religious standards promoted by the government.

Within the region, Iran is distinguished by the overt severity of the penalties; it imposes on consensual, adult homosexual conduct. Lavat, or sodomy, is punishable by execution on the first offence, regardless of whether the partner is passive or active. Article 111 of the Islamic Penal Code states that, “Lavat is punishable by death so long as both the active and passive partners are mature, of sound mind, and have acted of free will.” Death is also the punishment for the first offence involving sex between a Muslim and a non-Muslim. According to Articles 121 and 122 of the Penal Code, Tafkhiz (the rubbing together of thighs or buttocks, or other forms of non-penetrative “foreplay” between men) is punishable by one hundred lashes for each partner. Upon a fourth conviction of Tafkhiz the punishment is death. Article 123 of the Penal Code further provides that, “if two men who are not related by blood lie naked under the same cover without any necessity,” each will receive ninety-nine lashes.

According to Iran’s Penal Code, an accused person can be convicted of sodomy if he reiterates a confession to the act four times, or if four “righteous men” testify that they have witnessed the act. The Code also offers ways to circumvent this nominally high standard of evidence. Judges may lodge a conviction for sodomy based on “the knowledge of the judge,” in practice allowing a wide range of circumstantial evidence to be adduced as proof. Furthermore, the practice of torture is prevalent in Iran, and the practice of torturing prisoners to extract confessions is common. Forced confessions are openly accepted as evidence in criminal trials.

The death penalty for lavat does not merely exist on paper: it is practiced and enforced. Trials on morals charges in Iran are held in camera; yet, international outrage over the frequency of executions (Iran has the second highest rate of executions per capita in the world) has led the government to exercise tight controls over press reporting of the death penalty. For these reasons, confirming the frequency of executions for lavat is effectively impossible.

On December 5, 2007, Makvan Mouloodzadeh, a 21-year-old Iranian man was executed in Kermanshah Central Prison. He was found guilty of multiple counts of anal rape (ighab), allegedly committed when he was as young as 13 years old. At his trials, all the witnesses retracted their pre-trial testimonies, claiming to have lied to the authorities under duress.

Makvan also told the court that his confession was made under coercion and pleaded not guilty.

The Seventh District Criminal Court of Kermanshah in Western Iran and the Supreme Court nonetheless found him guilty and sentenced him to death. This ruling directly violated various legal codes of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Makvan was born on March 31, 1986, making him a minor back in 1999, at the time of the alleged crime. Article 113 of the Islamic Penal Code declares: “If a minor sodomizes another minor, both should be punished by up to 74 lashes, unless one of them is forced to do so.” Since the alleged sodomy happened when the defendant and his alleged partners were 13 years old, the death penalty was not technically applicable to this case. Although all the alleged witnesses and victims dismissed the sodomy charges, the defendant pleaded not guilty and there was no medical examination conducted to verify the case, the judge employed the “Knowledge of the Judge” clause as a way to prove sodomy in this case.

This case caused an international uproar. In response to mounting public pressure, and following a detailed petition submitted to the Iranian Chief Justice by Mr. Mouloodzadeh's lawyer, the Iranian Chief Justice, Ayatollah Seyed Mahmoud Hashemi Shahrudi, nullified the impending death sentence. The Iranian Chief Justice described the death sentence to be in violation of Islamic teachings, the religious decrees of high-ranking Shiite clerics, and the law of the land.

However, in defiance of the Chief Justice, the judges ultimately decided to ratify the original court's ruling and ordered the local authorities to carry out the execution. This case is a clear example of how convictions of sodomy can be obtained despite the absence of any credible evidence.

We are in 21st century but still discrimination for queer community do exist. Unfortunately in most of international reports about Iran, governments and United Nations are pointing to all human rights violation except queer people who are facing persecution on base of their sexual orientation.

Few days ago, France, on behalf of a member of the European Union, has tabled a resolution at the United Nations as the UN marks the 60th anniversary of its Declaration on Human Rights calling for governments worldwide to decriminalize homosexuality. The UN General Assembly is expected to adopt the resolution on December 10. If adopted, it will be non-binding on member states.

Iranian Queer Railroad would like to express its support and urges governments and United Nations to adopt this resolution because queer rights are human rights.

~~~~~~~~~

Resolution for a universal decriminalization of homosexuality

TO THE COUNCIL OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE UNITED NATIONS:
Resolution For a universal decriminalization of homosexuality

Considering The Universal declaration of Human Rights
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Considering

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966, entry into force 23 March 1976)
Article 17

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Considering The Human Rights Committee’s decision in Toonen v. Australia (04 April 1994),
We ask the Human Rights Council to request a universal abolition of the so-called "crime of homosexuality", of all "sodomy laws", and laws against so-called "unnatural acts" in all the countries where they still exist.

~~~~~

Homosexuality is illegal in at least 86 countries. The following have the death penalty: Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, Sudan, Nigeria and Mauritania.

Uganda: State Homophobia Threatens Health and Human Rights

By Human Rights Watch

In a country where homosexual conduct can be punished with life imprisonment, the Ugandan government’s latest call for arrests based on sexual orientation is a grave threat to basic freedoms, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to President Yoweri Museveni. The letter urged the government to repeal its colonial-era sodomy law and end a long record of harassing lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people.

On August 21, Uganda’s Radio One announced that Deputy Attorney General Fred Ruhindi had called for the criminal law to be used against lesbians and gays in Uganda. “I call upon the relevant agencies to take appropriate action because homosexuality is an offense under the laws of Uganda,” he reportedly said. “The penal code in no uncertain terms punishes homosexuality and other unnatural offenses.”

Homosexual acts are criminalized in Uganda under a sodomy law inherited from British colonial times, although punishments were substantially strengthened in 1990. Section 140 of the criminal code punishes “carnal knowledge against the order of nature” – interpreted to include consensual same sex relationships- with a maximum of life imprisonment.

“For years President Museveni’s government has drummed up homophobia and denied the basic rights of LGBT people for his own political advantage,” said Juliana Cano Nieto, researcher in the LGBT rights program at Human Rights Watch. “If lesbians and gays can be punished simply for speaking up for their rights, the freedoms of all Ugandans are endangered.”

This announcement came a week after an organization called Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), a coalition of four LGBT organizations--Freedom and Roam Uganda, Spectrum Uganda, Integrity Uganda and Icebreakers Uganda--launched a campaign called “Let us Live in Peace.”

In a press conference in Kampala on August 16th, the group condemned discrimination and violence against LGBT people, as well as the life-threatening silence about their sexualities in HIV/AIDS prevention programs. Juliet Victor Mukasa, a SMUG leader, described how authorities raided her home in 2005 and forced her into hiding.

In response, Ethics and Integrity Minister James Nsaba Buturo told the BBC on August 17 that homosexuality was "unnatural.” He denied charges of police harassment of LGBT people, but also declared, “We know them, we have details of who they are.”

In the wake of the SMUG press conference, Pastor Martin Ssempa organized an August 21 rally in Kampala to address what he called a call for action on behalf of victims of homosexuality.” Calling homosexuality “a criminal act against the laws of nature,” Ssempa led hundreds of demonstrators demanding government action against LGBT people. They also called for the deportation of an American intern at the national newspaper the Monitor who has reported on the experiences of gays and lesbians in Uganda.

Ssempa, whose Makerere Community Church has received HIV-prevention funding through the Bush administration’s President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) program, is well-known in Uganda for his campaigns against condom use as well as homosexuality. He has burned condoms in public to condemn their use in HIV prevention.

“Harassing rights defenders and silencing discussion of sexuality threaten more than freedom—they threaten life,” said Cano Nieto. “State homophobia and well-funded fanaticism are undermining Uganda’s efforts to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS.”

Human Rights Watch called on the government to end its long campaign of homophobic statements by top officials, and to ensure full integration of issues of sexual orientation and gender identity into nationwide HIV prevention and care programs.

Background Information

In addition to Section 140 of Uganda’s Penal Code, providing a maximum penalty of life imprisonment for homosexual conduct, Section 141 punishes “attempts” at carnal knowledge with a maximum of seven years’ imprisonment. Section 143 punishes acts of “gross indecency” with up to five years in prison. In both Britain and Uganda, these terms were long understood to describe consensual homosexual conduct between men. A sodomy conviction carries a penalty of 14 years to life imprisonment

Uganda government officials have regularly threatened and harassed lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Ugandans. In October 2004, James Nsaba Buturo, the country’s information minister at the time, ordered police to investigate and “take appropriate action against” a gay association allegedly organized at Uganda’s Makerere University.

State-owned media have repeatedly called for stronger measures against homosexual conduct. On July 6, 2005, an article in the government-owned New Vision newspaper urged authorities to crack down on homosexuality, saying, “The police should visit the holes mentioned in the press, spy on the perverts, arrest and prosecute them. Relevant government departments must outlaw or restrict websites, magazines, newspapers and television channels promoting immorality – including homosexuality, lesbianism, pornography, etc.”

Later that month, local government officers raided the home of Juliet Victor Mukasa, a lesbian activist and chairperson of SMUG. They seized documents and other materials, and arrested another lesbian activist and held her overnight. The two have since brought a case against the government for the harassment. Yvonne Oyoo and Juliet Victor Mukasa v. the Attorney General is currently being heard before the High Court.

On September 29, 2005, President Museveni signed into law a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. The amendment says that “marriage is lawful only if entered into between a man and a woman,” and specifies that “it is unlawful for same-sex couples to marry.” A parliamentary spokesperson said at the time that criminal penalties for engaging in such marriages would be imposed later.

The government has also silenced discussion of gay and lesbian rights and lives. The Broadcasting Council, a government licensing board for electronic media, fined a radio station 1.8 million shillings (more than US$1000) for hosting a lesbian and two gay men on a talk show, where they protested against discrimination and called for repeal of the sodomy laws. In February 2005, the Media Council – a state censorship board – banned a staging of the play, “The Vagina Monologues,” by the U.S. author Eve Ensler, because it “promotes illegal acts of unnatural sexual acts, homosexuality and prostitution.”

In August 2006, the tabloid paper Red Pepper published a list of first names, workplaces and other identifying information of 45 alleged homosexuals, all men. The paper claimed it was publishing the list “to show the nation … how fast the terrible vice known as sodomy is eating up our society.”

Iran’s gay exiles seek help in Turkey

Gays, lesbians and transsexuals suffer discrimination throughout the world, but in Iran, the difficulties are compounded by the government’s denial of their very existence.

Iran’s gay exiles seek help in Turkey "There are no gays in Iran" was the statement made in New York last year by the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in response to a question on the difficulties gays faced in Iran. It was met with incredulous smiles from the American audience he was addressing, but certainly could not have been more hurtful to the gays of his country.

Aside from negative social reactions toward people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender, or LGBT, the Islamic government of Iran recognizes homosexual intercourse as a "crime," penalized, at worst with the death penalty, at best a whipping.

This is why Iranian LGBTs, like many other oppressed groups, are looking for ways to flee their home country and many use Turkey as a temporary stop, until their asylum applications elsewhere are approved.

Arsham Parsi, an Iranian gay rights activist and founder of the Canada-based organization "Iranian Queer Railroad," tries to help asylum-seeking Iranian LGBTs during the lengthy and often painful asylum process. As he was a refugee himself in the past, Parsi knows personally the difficulties Iranian homosexuals endure while trying to escape, having experienced it first hand on his own "trip" from Iran to Canada, through Turkey.

The name of his organization is inspired from "The Underground Railroad," which was an informal network of secret routes and safe houses for black slaves, who wanted to flee the southern United States in the 19th century.

"In 2001, two of my gay friends committed suicide, as their families found out about their sexual orientation. I decided then to found an organization for LGBTs." Parsi told Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review at Istanbul’s Atatürk Airport on Thursday, after completing a visit to some central Anatolian provinces where most Iranian LGBT asylum seekers are to be found.

Parsi left Iran in 2005 and came to Kayseri, in central Anatolia, after he realized that Iranian police were looking for him because of his LGBT activities. "Turkey and Iran do not require visas for trips between them and transportation between the two countries is easy. We have buses everyday and also trains and planes," Parsi said. Currently there are around 160 Iranian LGBTs refugees throughout the world, 100 of who are in Turkey.

One of the most significant problems faced by Iranian refugees is a financial problem, Parsi said. These people, mainly young Iranians in their early 20s, meet with poverty after they run away. They need money for food, shelter and health care. Mistreatment from local residents, and sometimes from security forces, also makes their lives difficult. "They are beaten up for being homosexual and when they call police officers they do not let them file a compliant," Parsi said.

"When I was in Kayseri, I was attacked and called the police. They asked me why I was outside and told me to stay at home."

Locals and police are not gay-friendly, Parsi said. For instance, finding a house in the city is difficult, as landlords do not rent houses to single people. LGBTs then, try to find a gay-friendly couple and rent a house through them. It is also difficult to find jobs if they decide to work because they do not have a work permit. "They look for jobs like dish-washing or waiting. They work for almost a month and are then dismissed without being paid," Parsi said. Parsi, however, is also grateful to the Turkish government for allowing refugees to stay in Turkey.

The authorities settle refugees in Anatolian provinces such as Kayseri, Isparta, Konya and Niğde, which are known as conservative cities. The majority of LGBT Iranians stay in Kayseri, which is very conservative, although Isparta is a little bit better because the number of university students is high among the town’s population, Parsi said.

"I tell my fellows that Turkey is a secular country, but the people are religious, whereas Iran has a religious government but Iranians are secular," Parsi said, comparing the two countries.
Needing a sister organization

Parsi said there was a need for a sister organization in Turkey to support LGBT Iranians. He is familiar with both Kaos GL and LAMBDA Istanbul, two leading Turkish LGBT organizations. More efficient cooperation is needed, however, to ease bureaucratic processes, increase financial assistance to refugees and support their health care needs. "I also considered registering an ’Iranian Queer Railroad’ in Turkey," Parsi said.