Belgrade Gay Pride banned

By Paul Canning

Update 2 October: About 30 LGBT activists held a flashmob yesterday, stopping traffic for a few minutes on a main Belgrade street holding a 'Ljubav. Normalno' ('Love. Normal') banner. They were protected by riot police who have been deployed onto Belgrade streets yesterday and today.

Those opposed to the Gay Pride march are declaring a "a victory of family values" and a "victory of Serbian patriots."

Serbian politicians have reacted angrily to comment that they had capitulated to violent anti-gay forces. Human and Minority Rights Minister Milan Marković told B92:

“It’s far from the truth that the state has capitulated and that hooligans are more powerful than the state, that’s complete nonsense.”

Serbian parliament Speaker Slavica Đukić-Dejanović says Serbia has met all the conditions for the EU candidate status, expected 12 October, as bans on Pride marches were not 'set as a condition for other countries on their EU paths either'. There are other reasons why Serbia's EU bid may stay on hold, but, wrote The Economist:

"Its ban makes it look feeble and unwilling to stand up to threats from violent extremists. If the government can’t even ensure a peaceful Gay Pride march in its capital, goes the logic, how can it be ready to join the EU?"

Interior Minister Dačić said that when informed of the decision to ban all gatherings, including the Pride march, Western diplomats 'understood'. Western embassies were reportedly on a hit list for those planning to riot.

Update: The March has been banned. Interior Minister Dačić said:

“Police cannot support holding of all this gatherings for security reasons, because there will be clashes, victims, blood and we will end up a huge chaos.”

B92 said that police security assessments showed that extremists were planning on creating disturbances in several parts of Belgrade in order to weaken police forces, burning down ruling coalition parties’ headquarters.

Early reaction from Members of the European Parliament is not good. Ulrike Lunacek MEP, Co-President of the LGBT Intergroup of the parliament and substitute member of the South Eastern Europe delegation, reacted:

“I deeply regret that Serbian citizens will not be able to march for tolerance, acceptance and equality on Sunday. Serbian authorities have a duty to care for everyone’s safety, but it is profoundly disturbing that the leadership of a country seeking EU candidate status and membership—supported by a majority in the European Parliament—feel incapable of providing such safety for all citizens.”

“The government has to be much, much stricter towards extremists whipping up violence in the country . A society that cannot express itself for fear of violence is not a free, democratic society.”

Jelko Kacin MEP, European Parliament Rapporteur for Serbia’s accession and member of the LGBT Intergroup, and who is in Belgrade for the march, added:

“The decision to ban Pride Parade is a sovereign decision of the Serbian Government and the National Security Council. I receive such a decision with deep regret; as a matter of fact, it deprives citizens of the constitutional and legal right to free expression and peaceful assembly. A state seeking to access the EU must guarantee the human rights of its citizens.” 

ILGA-Europe said it "will bring it to the attention of the relevant officials of the European institutions to take further actions."

"This is a defeat for all citizens of Serbia: today, it's the gays, tomorrow, God knows which minority group," organiser Goran Miletic told reporters.

--

Serbian Interior Minister Ivica Dačić and the Mayor of Belgrade are calling for the cancellation of Sunday's Gay Pride march in Belgrade.

Numerous far-right, nationalist, fascist and Orthodox groups are planning counter-demonstrations and police have discovered that one right-wing group is using the codename "Belgrade in flames" for their operation against Gay Pride.

The 2010 parade attracted 600 people - and 20,000 opponents, who rioted resulting in many arrests and injuries. Numerous Facebook groups were set up with memberships in the tens of thousands which threatened to murder gays and their supporters. The leader of the nationalist organization Obraz, Mladen Obradovic, received a prison sentence for organising the violent counter demonstrations but this hasn't happened and he is organising counter demonstrations for Sunday.

The Police Union has also called for the gay pride march and counter-demonstrations to all be banned - over 100 of their members were injured last year.

According to SAPA:

The authorities can ban a scheduled public gathering up to 12 hours before it is due to start. The Daily Press wrote: “Chances are strong that Dačić will ban the parade and all other events” - those being four anti-gay demonstrations also planned for the weekend.

Pride Parade Organizing Committee member Goran Miletić told B92:

“The Pride Parade Organizing Committee will not call off the parade and believes that Mayor Đilas’ statement is completely shocking, bearing in mind that he put an equal sign between all the events announced for the weekend. I have to remind you that the announced rallies are those of the organizations that organized violence last year and whose leaders were convicted of the violence.”

According to a post on the march organisers website a 'secret meeting' was held at the German Embassy in Belgrade where it was agreed that the march should go ahead "at all costs"

"The meeting was attended by the ambassadors of Western countries, the top of the Serbian Interior Ministry, representatives of OSCE and the LGBT population, and similar meetings in previous days have been held in the British and the Polish Embassy."

An American attending the march told us that:

"Groups of neo-nazis and fascist extremists can already be seen at the airport and walking the streets of Beograd."

Related articles

• Audio: The Sisyphean task of Belgrade's gay pride march (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Report: Obama regime removing thousands denied due process

Image by StephenMitchell via Flickr

Source: National Immigration Law Center

Using a little-known government program, the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has pushed nearly 160,000 immigrants — many with deep ties to the United States — through an expedited deportation process, sometimes without adequately informing them of their right to a day in court, according to a new analysis of thousands of pages of released government documents.

The report, written by attorneys and law professors at Stanford Law School, the National Immigration Law Center, and Western State University College of Law, determined that DHS agents administering the program provided legally inaccurate portrayals of the opportunities to remain in the United States in order to boost deportation numbers, even though judges and others involved in the program voiced their concerns about how the program short-circuited individuals’ rights.

Authors procured the previously unreleased documents, which included emails, memos, and data, through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. According to the report, the documents revealed evidence that agents involved with the program routinely provided inaccurate and misleading information to detainees in deportation proceedings to coerce them into signing “stipulated orders of removal.” Such an order waives a noncitizen’s right to a day in court in exchange for speedy deportation. At least one immigration judge involved in the program determined that, “the waiver is not knowing in almost all cases.”

“The stipulated removal program has hit some of the most powerless members of our society the hardest:  poor immigrants who are in immigration detention, who don’t have lawyers, and who are facing minor, civil immigration charges.  Some of these noncitizens might actually have qualified to apply for lawful immigration status,” said Jennifer Lee Koh, lead author of the report and assistant professor of law at Western State University College of Law. “Unfortunately, the documents reveal a government agency that is willing to cut corners around immigrants’ constitutional due process rights in the name of boosting deportation numbers.”

Among the most troubling documents obtained through the lawsuit is a Spanish-language script, apparently used by agents administrating the program, to convince immigrants to sign the stipulated order of removal. The script, which is replete with grammatical errors and legal inaccuracies, erroneously informs immigrants that the “only” way to “fix” their papers is through certain family relationships and openly discourages immigrants from taking their cases to court.

“This report confirms what attorneys working in detention centers have heard for years: non-citizens, especially those with limited English skills, are pressured into signing documents without being informed of the severe consequences of their actions,” said Karen Tumlin, managing attorney at the National Immigration Law Center and co-author of the report. “Such activity flies in the face of our constitutionally-protected due process rights. Sadly, the DHS seems to have determined that flagrant disregard for the Constitution is a fair price to pay for the expedient expulsion of thousands of members of our communities.”

The report shows that the program, which began nearly a decade ago and dramatically expanded in 2003, has been encouraged by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers at various levels of the organization. According to documents reviewed by the authors of the report, field offices were encouraged to use the program to boost deportation numbers and given incentives to increase the number of stipulated orders of removal signed by detainees in their jurisdictions.

“The stipulated removal program is a misguided solution to the U.S. government’s practice of over-detaining immigrants,” said Jayashri Srikantiah, professor of law and director of the Immigrants’ Rights Clinic at Stanford Law School and co-author of the report. “The Obama administration should reconsider its detention practices instead of pressuring detainees to sign their own deportation orders.  Due process requires more than a coerced choice between continued detention and giving up one’s day in court.”

The documents released show evidence that the noncitizens ensnared by the program were not given accurate information about their rights or current immigration law, and the documents reviewed suggest there are no policies preventing administrators from offering stipulated orders of removal to juveniles, the mentally ill, or other vulnerable populations.

In 96% of all cases under the program analyzed by the authors of the report, immigrants did not have access to a lawyer, who could have provided immigrants with an accurate description of the often permanent ramifications of signing a stipulated order of removal. Authors propose a variety of policy recommendations to prevent future misuse of the program, including mandating that those who sign stipulated orders of removal hold brief meetings with judges to discuss the consequences of participation in this program, and expanding access to legal information and attorneys.

The FOIA lawsuit was filed by Stanford Immigrants’ Rights Clinic and the National Immigration Law Center on behalf of the National Immigration Law Center, the ACLU of Southern California, and the National Lawyers Guild-San Francisco Bay Area Chapter. The documents procured are available at http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/stipulatedremoval/.

Read more »

Video: Mexican gay activist fleeing persecution surfaces in San Diego

By Paul Canning

The Mexican gay activist Agustín Estrada Negrete has surfaced in San Diego, local TV news reports, and is claiming asylum.

We reported earlier this month on how Negrete and his lawyer had faced severe persecution, rape and death threats in the state of Mexico (which surrounds Mexico City) for their activist work.

Negrete was forced to step down from the position as director and founder of a local school, Centro de Atención Múltiple (CAM), for disabled children in 2007 due to false allegations by fellow staff against him that he had gone to the school dressed as a woman. He had in fact been pictured in newspapers at a LGBT rights march in the nearby city of Ecatepec de Morelos dressed as 'Alban' in La Cage Aux Folles.

At a meeting with state authorities in 2009 with supportive parents, Negrete was arrested and assaulted by police. Taken to a maximum security prison, Negrete was told that “El Gobernador del Estado México no te quiere por maricon, te vamos a desaparecer” (the Governor of the State of Mexico doesn’t like faggots, we’re going to make you disappear”). At the jail he was verbally and physically assaulted again and then sexually assaulted by men who covered their faces so as not to be identified.

After he was released, he continued to receive death threats and four months later men broke into a house he was in hiding in and he was raped with a metal tube and left for dead, a plastic bag over his head. The next week he was stabbed by men wearing State police uniforms. The following day he reported the incident to the authorities, who closed the door when they saw him arriving. On 22 November 2009 unknown individuals spray-painted the wall beside his sister's home with messages saying “Agustín vete, vas a morir putato” (Agustín leave, you are going to die whore).

Negrete in an interview with French gay magazine Tetu claimed that his former lover was the State of Mexico politician and candidate of the right-wing PRI for State Governor Eruviel Ávila Villegas. "They did everything to silence me because it is important that Eruviel Ávila is not out of the closet," he said. He said that he was approached to negotiate his silence, "but after the rape I suffered, I do not want to negotiate."

He had reported the assaults and called on the National Commission for Human Rights, Consejo Para Prevenir la Discriminación- CONAPRED (the Council for the Prevention of Discrimination), the Minister for Education and the Minister for Health, among others, to take action. But the complaint wasn't accepted - Negrete was told “we are not allowed to take any declaration from you” - and warned not to continue with the particular complaint if he wanted to remain alive.


US asylum is reportedly becoming harder for LGBT Mexicans because of a perception amongst US authorities that legal progress, such as gay marriage in Mexico City, means that the country is safe for LGBT. It is unclear whether Negrete has faced problems with his asylum case because of this changed attitude and the legal circuit is which he has claimed is understood to be the most accepting of LGBT asylum claims in the United States.

There is a petition to the Mexican authorities regarding Negrete's treatment.

Negrete is being supported by Patti Bowman, co-president of PFLAG San Diego. She told local TV:

"I'm getting involved because I fear for his life. If he goes back, he will be imprisoned or tortured or worse."

"I'm scared, but if I could go back in time, I would wear that dress again … and add a rainbow," said Estrada Negrete.

Negrete said that he has been interviewed about his claim and is expecting to receive a decision in about a month.

Related articles

• Is the USA closing the door to LGBT Mexican asylum seekers? (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Why is Mexico persecuting gay lawyer Jaime López Vela? (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Iran's repression of LGBT to face challenge at UN

Saghi Ghahraman

Iran's human rights violations on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity will be considered by the United Nations Human Rights Committee Universal Periodic Review 17 October.

Human Rights Watch has made a detailed submission, as has Amnesty International. Excerpts from Amnesty's submission follows below as does the submission of the Iranian Queer Organization - IRQO.

~~~


By Saghi Ghahraman (IRQO)

Right after the revolution, execution of Gay and Transsexuals began, by the ruling clergies, illegally; it was legalized in 1995 - two decades after the revolution – when Shari’a law, Islam’s Code of Conduct, legally replaced Iran’s penal code.

Article 110 – executions based on sodomy; Article 130 – executions based on lesbianism; Article 220 – granting fathers the right to kill their children, recognizing fathers as blood-owners of their own children, turned State and Society, equally, into executioners of gays, lesbians, bi, and transsexual population, and also the heterosexuals; clergies have used sodomy laws against those prisoners who couldn’t be executed or persecuted otherwise.

Shari’a law is not only responsible for killing of LGBT members of society in Iran, it is also the basis of generations of LGBT’s lack of parenting, education, carrier, housing, and overall security and safety.

The fact that no LGBT Iranian dares to introduce themselves as L, G, B or T by their own voice, face, name is because of the fear-mongering articles of Shari’s sodomy law.

Since the government in Iran doesn’t offer any explanation for hostility against the gay community, and because there are signs of lack of relevant information in the government re homosexuals, I would like to quote a gay blogger’s advise to Mr. Ahmadinejad when he was first elected president of Iran on 2005:

"I urge you, Sir, as the president of Iran, to employ a team of medical scientists and lawyer to study and investigate homosexuality, come up with a result of the studies, and present it; if they announce homosexuality illness or crime, we oblige; if they say it was not, you, as the state of Iran, oblige, and decriminalize homosexuality and let us live in peace."

The task has not been undertaken by the government Iran, curiously.

While Mr. Ahmadinejad claims 'There Are No Homosexuals in Iran', his statesmen and spokespersons claim 'Homosexuals Are the Force behind Iran’s Green Movement'. Question is: Do we not have homosexuals in Iran? Or, we do, and they’re so many and so capable as to be the back-bone of a huge civil movement as Iran’s Green Movement? Question is: what is considered crime, or what is considered crime on the part of homosexuals? Sexual orientation, or doubting patriarchy in the face of a primitive ideology?

Living as a Queer woman over 50 years, a Queer poet over 20 years, directing a LGBT advocacy organization over five years, I have been witness to the horror the community in Iran goes through, everyday, not only by way of murders and executions but in everyday life of Not Living a simple, decent, dignified life human beings deserve in the realm in the Age of Democracy and Human Rights. And I am not talking only about those of our children who are disadvantaged and deprived, but also about gay professors, TS engineers, lesbian and gay specialist medical doctors, gay and lesbian poets, writers, artists, journalists and more, of highly accomplished status, all working inside Iran, who are victims in the hand of a hostile set of laws, and are most vulnerable.

I would like to offer the government of Iran to give account and explanation for violations of LGBT human rights. Or, to replace the primitive penal code of Shari’a law with constitutions based on 21st century human rights. Or if either is not doable, I would like to suggest that Mr. Ahmadinejad, the head of state of Iran, in his trips to the UN, travel to the USA on the back of a camel. After all, we, the LGBT of Iran shouldn’t be only ones treated with the mind-set of the dark-ages of 1400 years back in history.

~~~

Amnesty International has called on the Iranian authorities to cooperate fully with all UN human rights mechanisms, including by allowing the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Iran to conduct fact-finding missions to Iran.

Read more »

Want to lodge a UK asylum claim? Good luck with that

Croydon queues. Image Free Movement

Source: Guardian

By Owen Bowcott

Asylum seekers are being prevented from lodging claims for permission to stay in the UK unless their lawyers threaten legal action, according to the Law Society.

In a strongly worded criticism of shortcomings at the Asylum Screening Unit (ASU) in Croydon, south London, the body which represents solicitors complains of "degrading treatment", telephones constantly engaged or rarely answered and individuals who arrive in person being sent away.

The letter, sent to the head of the ASU and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), highlights concerns voiced by other groups about facilities in Croydon – the only place in the whole of the UK where asylum claims can be made.

Mark Paulson, head of the Law Society's family and social justice section, said that the only certain means of securing an appointment was for solicitors to send in "pre-action protocol" letters on behalf of clients announcing they were instigating judicial review proceedings.

In July, Law Society representatives met ASU officials to raise concerns about problems. The situation, they claim, has deteriorated since then: "In recent months [we have] received reports of asylum seekers who are finding it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to register their claim for asylum, or who experience what appear to be quite unnecessary difficulties ..."

"Our members' experience and others' reports … have highlighted the negative and sometimes quite degrading treatment of people on their arrival at the ASU and the appalling nature of the physical environment which they expected to be in for often prolonged and indeterminate periods of time."

Registering asylum applications as soon as possible is vital for claimants. Any delay undermines the credibility of their case. Without registering, they cannot gain access to benefits or support for accomodation.

The letter contained nine case studies. One detailed the experience of an elderly Zimbabwean woman who caught a bus at 3am in order to arrive at Croydon by 7am where she was given a letter informing her that she was too late to be seen that day.

The Law Society said there was a conflict between the UKBA's role as protector of the nation's borders – keeping people out – and its international treaty responsibilities under the 1951 UN Convention on refugees.

The coalition's commitment to reduce net migration to tens of thousands in the current parliament's lifetime meant that the first duty was being given primacy, Paulson suggested.

The UKBA's website acknowledges that it experiences delays, explaining that:

"The Asylum Screening Unit operates an appointment system and will also accept applicants on a walk-in service. If you choose to use the walk-in service, you should be aware that depending on your personal circumstances, there will be no guarantee that you will be seen. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that you book an appointment."

A number of solicitors raise similar complaints about the ASU in the latest issue of the Law Society Gazette. Alice Boyle, an immigration partner at the law firm Duncan Lewis, said:

"It always takes the whole day to get through (to the ASU) – if you manage at all. Our public law team has considered judicial reviews, but on each occasion an appointment has been secured before any further action was taken."

Alison Stanley, head of immigration at Bindmans solicitors, described her 'Kafkaesque' dealings with the ASU. She said:

"You have secretaries sitting all day pressing the redial button, but never get through, and so you turn up without an appointment. You queue for hours and then get sent away. Telephone us, they say, and make an appointment."

Russell Blakely, an immigration specialist at the law firm Wilson, said:

"The ASU has suddenly become more chaotic which, by coincidence, suits the UKBA. If it's harder to claim asylum, then fewer are going to do so – bringing the statistics down."

In response to the Law Society's letter, the UK Border Agency said:

"We are confident that the care provided to asylum seekers at the Asylum Screening Unit in Croydon is of a good standard.

"Asylum seekers are given access to interpreters and information regarding the asylum process and how to contact legal representatives. UKBA takes complaints very seriously and has processes in place for those using the unit to raise any concerns they may have."

The UNHCR said that it had been working with the UKBA since 2004 on the Quality Integration Project which is designed to improve the agency's processing of asylum claims. It declined to comment on the letter.

Related articles

• Breakthrough: UK to record sexuality-based asylum claims (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• In UK, Border Agency mistakes costing government millions (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Audio: The Sisyphean task of Belgrade's gay pride march

Pic: Jonathan Davis

By Paul Canning

Last year, writing for the Serbian news website Vreme, Predrag Azdejković compared the organisers of Belgrade's gay pride parade to Sisyphus.

"They have been trying to organize the parade since 2001, but its stone rolls downhill every time. The organizers, like Sisyphus, cannot give up so they return to the bottom of the hill and start rolling the stone back to the top, hoping to succeed every time. Unlike Sisyphus, who was punished by gods to roll it uphill, the gay parade's organizers chose the punishment willingly, and, believe me, organizing a gay parade in Serbia is a punishment indeed."

The 2010 parade attacted 600 people - and 20,000 opponents, who rioted resulting in many arrests and injuries. Numerous Facebook groups were set up with memberships in the tens of thousands which threatened to murder gays and their supporters. The leader of the nationalist organization Obraz, Mladen Obradovic, received a prison sentence for organising the violent counter demonstrations

The 2010 parade followed the cancellation the previous year, which was seen as the State giving in to threats. It had the support of Interior Minister Ivica Dačić and Human and Minority Rights Minister Svetozar Čiplić, as well as by the majority of parliamentary parties in Serbia.

The first Belgrade Pride parade, in 2001, ended with dozens of marchers injured by marauding nationalists, skinheads and football fans.

Organising committee member Goran Miletić said:

“I believe that police can secure the gathering [this year] so everything would go well. The state has showed that it can protect all the citizens, which is visible in matches. The parade is not a threat to security.”

Police have discovered that one right-wing group is using the codename "Belgrade in flames" for their operation against Gay Pride.

Politicians including the Belgrade Mayor have tried to get the 2011 parade called off because they know the same opponents will be out in force. But Serbia as well as Croatia - where a pride march suffered a vicious attack in Split 11 June - are candidates for the expansion of the European Union, and politicians know that their treatment of LGBT people and facilitating a safe gay pride parade is a crucial factor in whether they will be admitted.

One exception is United Serbia (JS) leader Dragan Marković Palma who was forced to clarify that his party had never called for violence and bloodshed but that they will never support Gay Pride because “Serbia has more important things to do”.

This was Marković’s response to Gay-Straight Alliance NGO’s announcement that they will file a lawsuit against him “for homophobia, discrimination and violation of equality”.

Marković said that:

“homosexuality was considered a disease 20 years ago, not according to Dragan Marković Palma, but according to the World Health Organization, but it was taken off the disease list under pressure from powerful lobbies”.

Read more »

David Mugerwa was removed to Uganda last night

David Mugwera

By Paul Canning

The Ugandan asylum seeker David Mugerwa was removed last night. At the time of writing he is being interrogated by Ugandan Immigration Police at Entebbe airport.

We wrote about David's case on Monday.

Since Monday, new evidence establishing David's sexuality has come forward however, because of the lack of time available since we became aware of the case, although this evidence was submitted yesterday afternoon to UK Border Agency, it was too late to stop the removal. Although David resisted he was handcuffed and otherwise restrained.

His friends are trying to ensure that he is met at the airport, however David was told he was not welcome in his home area, a suburb of Kampala, and members of his family also did not want him to return.

Even if he relocates, it will be impossible for David to be openly gay in Uganda and not face threats from society and also possible arrest. Even as a closeted gay man he will face questioning and possible real threats to his life.

There are a number of disturbing aspects to this case, such as his lawyer not being informed he was detained, as well as unfortunate ones, such as David not finding or realising he did have evidence of his sexuality until too late. In many ways the case is unfortunately typical of how LGBT asylum seekers are failing to receive sanctuary, how - for whatever reasons - the system is failing them. How we are still sending them back when it is not safe to do so.

This is a complicated case but nevertheless all too typical. We hope to look in more detail about both what happened and, with David's cooperation, also look at what he now faces in Uganda. 

Audio: Interview with Ugandan lesbian activist Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera

Interview with Ugandan lesbian activist Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera, from Freedom and Roam Uganda, by World Radio Switzerland.

Nigerian anti-same-sex marriage bill debated

Image via Wikipedia

Via Box Turtle Bulletin

By Jim Burroway

The West African country whose over-reaching attempt in 2009 to impose severe penalties on human rights advocacy and free association for its LGBT citizens under the guise of “banning” same sex marriage was met with international alarm from human rights activists, is at it again. The Nigerian Senate debated a bill yesterday which would make entering into a same-sex marriage a criminal offense, with three years’ imprisonment for couples convicted of being married, and five years’ imprisonment for anyone who “witnesses, abets and aides” the solemnization of the marriage. Homosexuality is already a criminal offense in Nigeria, where it carries a penalty of fourteen years imprisonment in the south and capital punishment in areas in the north which are under Sharia Islamic Law. Nigeria’s The Daily Times reports that the bill passed it first reading on July 13, and that no Senators rose to oppose the bill during Tuesday’s debate.

It is unknown at this time what the exact provisions under the new law would be [see below for more]. The proposed 2009 law which ostensibly banned same-sex marriage went much further than simply addressing same sex marriage. The 2009 proposal, like its current incarnation, provided for a prison sentence of three years for anyone who has “entered into a same gender marriage contract,” and it also would have defined same-sex marriage as any gay couples found living together. Also like the new proposal, it also provided for five years’ imprisonment or a fine for anyone who “witnesses, abet and aids the solemnization” of a same-sex marriage. But the 2009 law also went much further, by making criminals of anyone working in organizations which advocate for gay rights. LGBT advocates point pointed out that the proposed bill law would punish those who “aids and abets” people to live together with a tougher sentence than the couple concerned.
It is unknown at this time what, if any, additional provisions are included in the current proposal.

Spokesperson for the Nigerian Senate expect the bill to pass by the end of next year. The United States State Department have joined international human rights groups in strongly condemning the bill, pointing out that it would the freedoms of expression, association and assembly guaranteed by international law as well as by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The law would also impose an impediment to the struggle against the spread of AIDS in the oil-producing west African nation.

~~~

A BTB reader found a copy of Nigeria’s latest proposal to not just ban same-sex marriage (it’s already illegal in Nigeria), but to impose criminal penalties on anyone who enters into a same-sex marriage — as well as for anyone who “witnesses, abets and aids the solemnization of a same gender marriage contract.” The penalty for entering into a same-sex marriage under the proposed measure would be three years’ imprisonment. The penalty for witnessing/aiding/abeting a marriage would bring five years imprisonment or a fine of ₦2,000 (2,000 naria, or US$13 in a country where the average annual income is US$1,200). If a group of persons witness/aid/abet a marriage, the fine is ₦50,000. It’s unclear whether two people at a wedding would be considered two individuals or a group. The bill also does not define what constitutes witnessing, abetting or aiding in the solemnization of a marriage.

Read more »

In Italy, prosecution opens into floating detention centres

Source: La Repubblica

Translation by Chiara Lauvergnac

The Prosecutor opened an investigation into the Palermo floating Cie, or the two ships still stationed in the port of Palermo, with about three hundred Tunisians on board, illegally detained for weeks the conditions of their detention have been contested. The decision of the prosecutor Leonardo Agueci, who coordinates the investigation, came after the presentation of a petition presented this morning by some members of the anti-racist movement in Palermo. Among the signatories of the complaint are Professor Fulvio Vassallo Paleologo (lawyer and member dell'Asgi), Judith Gleitze (Borderline Sicily, which in recent months has constantly monitored the situation in Lampedusa) and then Peter Milazzo (Sicily CGIL ) and Anna Bucca (ARCI).

The complaint indicates that the Tunisian prisoners on ships in the port of Palermo are illegally deprived of freedom, without right to legal defense and without the validation of a judge and asks the presence of six children on board and a pregnant woman is clarified, as denounced yesterday by the member of Parliament, Alessandra Siragusa of the Democratic Party and the regional member of Democrats, Pino Apprendi, after visiting the floating Cie, on the side of the demonstration at the port of Palermo by anti-racist movements. Here is an excerpt dell'esposto, asking to make clarity also in the beatings occurred in Lampedusa against a Canadian activist and an imprisoned Tunisian still in a coma at the hospital of Palermo.

"To our knowledge, no formal measures have been issued authorizing the detention of the migrants on the ships," said Fulvio Vassallo Paleologo, professor of asylum law at the University of Palermo. "In fact they are denied the right to defense and freedom of communication with the outside, as it happens in the Cie. It is demonstrated by the fact that they have confiscated their mobile phones. We ask the judiciary to verify compliance with the procedures laid down to implement the repatriation and EU rules in the  forced removal of foreigners in irregular position."

 At the moment, the investigation of the Prosecutor is against persons unknown.

~~

This story was corrected 29 September following comment by Prof. Bruce Leimsidor. He said:

"No one questions the right of the state to detain these people, who are most likely simply economic migrants. It is unclear if they have already been adjudicated, or if they even have requested asylum. But at any rate, the state has a prefect right, and even obligation, to detain them until their cases have been adjudicated. Their detention is certainly not illegal. Nor does the Repubblica story imply this."

Related articles

• Italy Continues Shipboard Detention of Hundreds of Tunisians (migrantsatsea.wordpress.com)

Claim: No gays in Chechnya

Image via Wikipedia

By GayRussia.Ru

We already heard from the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that there are no gays in Iran, a country where homosexuality is punished by death penalty. A Chechen news agency seems to be of the same position.

"There is no such "immoral phenomenon" as homosexuality in Chechnya" said the News Agency 'The Chechen Republic Today'.

"The country does not have such completely amoral phenomena as drug addiction, pedophilia, homosexuality and prostitution, which are all alien to Chechens," writes Marat Batalov, a columnist of the agency in an article published on June 29 in 'Russians, look at the roots'.

This categorical statement recalls previous anti-gay speeches of Ramzan Kadirov, the head of the Chechen Republic who once said in June 2008:

"For a Chechen, the worst crime is to say: I'm friend with a gay! I should not even utter a word,"

In 2009, Ramzan Kadyrov also verbally attacked gay clubs in Russia which according to him aimed at "weakening the state, the weakening of the will, honor and courage."

"Gay clubs open! Every day! If it goes on like this, we will simply have no power, no spirit," he said in an interview to Rossiyskaya Gazeta.

Meanwhile, it is clear that if homosexuality is forced into resistance in Chechnya, it is as common as in any other part of the world. The invisibility of gays and lesbians do not mean their absence. The fear to be open about their sexual orientation in the Chechen Republic only force gays and lesbians to keep as discreet as possible. Those who can choose to emigrate in Moscow but the Russian capital is not a very welcoming place for people from the Caucasus.

Related articles

• Video: Ahmadinejad: 'No, still no gays in Iran' (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Video: European Parliament welcomes recent UN developments on sexual orientation and gender identity

Catherine Ashton image via Wikipedia

Source: The European Parliament's Intergroup on LGBT Rights

Today the European Parliament joined the United Nations’ call for safeguarding the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in the world. The text was co-signed by 6 out of 7 political groups, and adopted with a very wide majority.

Welcoming the adoption in June of the first-ever resolution on ‘Human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity’ at the United Nations Human Rights Council, the European Parliament confirmed its concern regarding “human rights violations and widespread discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, both in the European Union and [abroad]”.

With today’s text, the European Parliament welcomed the work done by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay for the human rights of LGBT people worldwide. MEPs also addressed a range of recommendations to the European Commission and EU states in order to improve the EU’s own human rights record.

The resolution followed a short debate during which Catherine Ashton, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, presented the important work done by the EU and Member States to safeguard the human rights of LGBT people in the world. She also expressed her support for the proposal of an EU-wide comprehensive roadmap against homophobia and transphobia.

Reacting to the vote, Michael Cashman MEP, Co-President of the European Parliament’s Intergroup for LGBT Rights, said:

“Catherine Ashton and the European External Action Service showed their clear commitment to universal and indivisible human rights, including for LGBT people. Today the elected representatives of 500 million citizens stood by this commitment, joining countries from around the world such as South Africa and Brazil.”

Ulrike Lunacek MEP, Co-President of the LGBT Intergroup, continued:

“The Parliament adopted a very strong and sensible resolution, repeating that the EU itself still hasn’t achieved genuine equality in the struggle against homophobia and transphobia. Our demand for global equality is not isolated: the Organization of American States adopted a similar resolution in June, and ever more countries from all continents keep raising their concern about violence and discrimination of LGBT people. This is a truly global call.”

Today’s text mandates the European External Action Service and EU Member States to step up their work for the human rights of LGBT people worldwide.

• European Parliament resolution adopted today (Final version, PDF)
• The UN Human Rights Council resolution of 17 June 2011
• The Toolkit to Promote and Protect the Enjoyment of all Human Rights by LGBT People

Related articles

• Diplomatic leak shows 'cold' French opposition to LGBT asylum rights (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• EU surveys LGBT rights Union-wide (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

New mobile phone restrictions in UK detention centre

Image via Wikipedia

Source: Corporate Watch

New detainees arriving at Yarl's Wood immigration prison, run by outsourcing giant Serco, are being given new mobile phones locked to O2 SIM cards with the back covers glued on so that no other SIM cards can be used, Corporate Watch can reveal. The new system, criticised by campaigners for isolating, monitoring and exploiting detainees even further, follows a similar scheme introduced by G4S in Tinsley House, near Gatwick airport.

The new phone system in Yarl's Wood started last month for new arrivals, with the aim of rolling it out for “the majority of residents” by the end of October. According to Serco, there are no immediate plans to roll it out to its other detention centre, Colnbrook, near Heathrow.

A letter handed by the management to all detainees in early August 2011 stated:

“Every resident will be issued with a mobile phone on the O2 network, which has the strongest mobile phone signal of all the networks in the Yarl's Wood area ... This will be phased in over the next few weeks.” 

The letter adds that the phones have a “built-in SIM card and a fixed mobile telephone number”, and that O2 top-up credit “can be purchased from [the centre's] shop”.

Earlier this year, Corporate Watch revealed that G4S had contracted secure telecommunications company Global Comms and Consulting Ltd (GCC) to run a new phone system in Tinsley House, one of its Gatwick immigration prisons. Detainees were given special new phones that could be monitored and disrupted when necessary by the immigration authorities or the prison's management. Calls were also said to be more expensive and detainees were not able to call free numbers. The new contract between Serco and O2 seems to be Serco's response to G4S's trial scheme, which was expected to be rolled out to all other detention centres in the UK if “successful”.

'Best coverage'

The Yarl's Wood O2 phones come with an initial £5 free credit but detainees say this runs out “much faster than it should.” Although Serco claims that its rates are “competitive”, O2 is not the cheapest mobile network for calls within the UK or abroad, and many detainees prefer to use low-cost providers such as Lebara and Lyca. But Serco insists that the reason for choosing O2 is that it provides “the best signal coverage at Yarl's Wood”, declining to comment on whether other providers were considered before deciding on O2.

Read more »

A(nother) day in the life of homophobic Russia

Arrest of Dan Choi at Moscow Pride 2011. Pic GayRussia.eu

By Paul Canning

In the latest news from homophobic Russia: Moscow police have stopped investigating the bashing of a lesbian journalist; Moscow authorities refuse to register LGBT NGOs; and another Russian region wants to outlaw LGBT and pro-gay organising.

But, in good news, 'liberal' St Petersberg held a successful LGBT festival.

Elena Kostyuchenko is a well-known Russian journalist who recently came out as lesbian in her newspaper, Novaya Gazeta.

At the May Moscow Pride march she was beaten up in full view of the world's media. But Moscow police just announced that they were closing the case due to 'lack of evidence'. The man who bashed her, Roman Lisunova, now has the right to bring a civil action for compensation for moral damages for unlawful prosecution - this was explained to him by the police investigator.

Kostyuchenko told Moscow Times:

"It appears that in Moscow anyone can beat a person in broad daylight with witnesses and in front of the cameras and get away with it."

Also this week, the Russian Ministry of Justice has again refused to register four gay organizations in Moscow, which means that the capital has still not registered a single open-social organisation of sexual minorities.
Russian activists have pledged to sue the refusal to register their groups before the European Court of Human Rights.

Russian gay leader and organiser of Moscow Pride, Nikolai Alekseev, pointed out that gay groups have been registered in St. Petersburg.

"The impression is that Moscow and St. Petersburg are cities located in different countries," he said. "There is no unity of legal space in Russia, none."

In 2010 a request to register the 'Movement for Marriage Equality' was denied on 'public morality' grounds. A complaint against Russia about that is with the European Court of Human Rights, as is one from the LGBT organization Raduzhny Dom (Rainbow House) from the city of Tyumen, 2000k east of Moscow.

In the court, the Russian state is arguing that:

“The activities of this organization relate to propaganda for un-traditional sexual orientations that could result in an undermining of the safety of Russian society and government. The spiritual values of society are being undermined, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation are being undermined in terms of preserving her population.  Moreover, the activities of this organization could arouse social and religious hatred and hostility, which also signifies the extreme nature of their activities. Propaganda for untraditional sexual orientations is encroaching on the institutions of marriage and family as protected under the law”.

Read more »

Video: In US, private contractors make a killing off Border Crackdown

Source: RTAmerica



While many American industries are slowing down, the private prison industry is booming. Much of that is attributed to their lobbying efforts, which some say create the condition for mass incarceration. The private prison lobby has had major influence in places like Florida, Arizona, Georgia, Utah and Alabama, states which have recently passed some of the strictest anti-immigrant policies. Policies, which would likely help fill those prison cells.

Illegal immigrants cash cow for corporations

Read more »

Two steps forward .. Turkey and LGBT

Fatma Şahin

By Paul Canning

Turkey has taken one small step forward for LGBT recognition with, for the very first time, a government minister meeting LGBT representatives.

The Pembe Hayat (Pink Life) Association were invited to a meeting with civil society organizations on Wednesday 21 September to discuss violence against women with Minister of Family and Social Policy Fatma Şahin.

Belgin Çelik from Pembe Hayat told reporters following the meeting that she had submitted a proposal for the acceptance of homosexual, bisexual and transgender individuals in the new constitution that Parliament plans to draft in the coming legislative year.

Şahin encouraged the proposal, saying:

“We would like to actively work with you and your participation and suggestions will help us learn and acknowledge the problems you face.”

Pro-gay Turkish MP Aylin Nazlıaka has asked for LGBT groups to be consulted over the new constitution.

Calling on members of Parliament to handle the proposal positively, Şahin said:

"If freedom and equality is for everybody, then sexual orientation discrimination should be eliminated and rights of these [LGBT] citizens should be recognized.”

However Turkish MPs may face a problem reading any proposals. A report last week said that web access in the Turkish Parliament to the websites of various LGBT organisations is blocked and workers or MPs have to submit a written request for them to be unblocked.

Blocking of LGBT and other online content is widespread in Turkey, in May there was a huge protest against the internet “filtering” system.

According to a representative of Lambdaİstanbul.

"BTK (The Information Technologies and Communication Authority) has determined some banned words from domain names. “gay” and “lesbian” are on this list. Pembe Hayat (Pink Life) Association, an LGBT organization in Ankara, has been warned by their web hosting company saying their website might be shut down. There is no pornographic content whatsoever on Pembe Hayat’s website but they have been warned just because they use those words."

In June Amnesty International published 'Not an illness nor a crime': Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Turkey demand equality'. It said:

“…not a single provision has been brought before Parliament to protect the right to non-discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Instead, there has been a long line of discriminatory statements by government officials from which the government has failed to distance itself or issue apologies for.”

Related articles

• In Turkey, how online censorship impacts LGBT (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Video: Using law to make refugees disappear

Sourse: refugeeresearch



A seminar by Audrey Macklin, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto.

Refugees have been disappearing from public discourse for many years, supplanted by the economic migrant, the fraud, the terrorist, the illegal, the smuggling customer, etc. One effect has been to prepare the political ground for laws that actually make refugees disappear by deterring their arrival and expediting their rejection. Professor Macklin discusses two recent initiatives that illustrate this phenomenon: The "Balanced Refugee Reform Act" and the "Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act".

Hosted by CERIS-The Ontario Metropolis Centre and The Centre for Refugee Studies (CRS) at York University, Toronto Canada

Related articles

• Report: Asylum and 'credible fear' issues in US immigration policy (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Canadian refugee law changes 'will adversly effect LGBT' (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

UK Home Office again saying Uganda safe to return LGBT asylum seekers to

David Mugwera

By Paul Canning

Another Ugandan asylum seeker is about to be removed from the UK in part because of a flawed legal process. Misquoting legal precedent, the Home Office said Uganda is safe for gay people so long as either they are discreet or they relocate.

This is the third case this year which we are aware of where a lesbian or gay Ugandan asylum claim has in part been refused on this incorrect basis. The precedent ignored by the Home Office is a 2010 High Court decision - 'SB' - which accepted a mountain of evidence from NGOs and other experts of gay men - and crucially in SB's case also of lesbians - being arrested in Uganda just because of their sexual identity and their being persecuted within society.

The case of David Mugwera was considered by Judge AW Khan in Birmingham 3 August. In his decision refusing Mugwera's asylum claim Khan quotes the Home Office saying:

As to risk of return, if the Appellant was found to be credible, he was not at risk in line with decision in JM (2008) UKAIT 0065. Matters have not changed so dramatically that one could depart from JM as a country guidance case in accordance with what was said in SI Ethiopia [2007] UKAIT 0012. One could only depart from country guidance cases in strictly limited situations. The appellant could live discreetly in Uganda out of his own choice. He had claimed asylum because of fear from his family and not from fear from the authorities. He could relocate to another part of Uganda.

The JM decision was that LGBT could be safely returned to Uganda if they relocated and lived 'discreetly' and that Uganda's sodomy law was not used to jail homosexuals. In another Ugandan case we reported in February it was Home Office lawyers quoting 'JM' and arguing that:

"while there may be disapproval of homosexuality, instances of violence and discrimination, there is no persecution."

In the case of another Ugandan, Robert Segwanyi, the Home Office repeatedly cited a decision on his case by Judge Hembrough last November, which also incorrectly quotes JM as precedent, as the reason for rejecting Segwanyi's case - and crucially the Home Office says:

"It is not considered that the treatment of homosexuals in Uganda has significantly worsened since the date of the Immigration Judge's determination" (my emphasis).

Any reference to either discretion or relocation is wrong as the 2010 Supreme Court decision specifically rules this out as a reason for rejecting LGBT asylum claims.

Although the UK Border Agency (UKBA) rejected that Mugwera was gay they did nevertheless suggest that he could relocate to the North of Uganda.

21 year old Mugwera came to the UK last year as a law student and claimed asylum before the end of his visa. His claim has been rejected, he is now without a lawyer and he is due to be removed on Wednesday 28 September at 8pm on Kenya Airways flight KQ410.

He walked in unprepared to the Croydon UKBA office in March and documents we have seen show that there is little physical evidence for his case, it almost entirely relies on his testimony.

We understand that he does not 'present' as gay.

His testimony is that his teenage relationship with another boy in Uganda was discovered and he believes that an aunt used it to blackmail his father (who has since died). When he was discovered with his boyfriend he was beaten by relatives, although this beating is not mentioned in the documents for his case (apparently because he was never asked a direct question regarding this treatment by the UKBA case officer).

His father paid for him to study law in the UK and this was also to 'keep him out of harm's way'. Mugwera had been told that he was possessed by the devil, a common occurrence in Africa. His remaining family has sent him letters disowning him and warning that he should not return. His mother's house was defaced with graffiti after his sexuality became known in the middle-class suburb of Kampala in which he lived.

Mugwera says he decided to claim asylum after receiving the threatening letters. Because of his father's death, Mugwera did not receive the fees to cover his continuing study - Judge Khan suggests that this was why he submitted the asylum claim.

Since he came to the UK he has had only one brief relationship with a married man who he is not in contact with any more. He says he went to the Hoist club in Vauxhall, London, on a few occasions.

Mugwera is not believed to be gay by UK Border Agency because of minor discrepancies in his testimony, primarily because of the dating of his relationship with the boy. He explained the difference was between when they got to know each other and when they started a serious relationship but this difference was taken to seriously undermine his credibility.

Another issue was with the letters from his family disowning him and telling him not to return, one of which had an incorrect date and in which the blackmailing aunt was not mentioned. Although explanations were offered they were not believed and this was taken to undermine his credibility by UKBA.

His previous lawyer's have pointed out that Mugwera "has not exaggerated his case and had not bolstered his asylum claim by saying that he had been to the Hoist Club on more than two occasions and that he had only one relationship in Uganda and another one in the UK."

But the Judge noted that he had not been given evidence that Mugwera had been persecuted in Uganda and that there was no evidence of the blackmail of his father.

He said that the verbal testimony of Mugwera was not enough and that he could have been to the Hoist Club "out of simple curiosity". He rejected the letters as evidence.

The Judge dismisses Mugwera's claim as "contrived". He suggested that as Mugwera would live discreetly in order to not upset his family, therefore the Supreme Court rules were invoked and protection was not needed.

Since the 3 August decision, Mugwera has submitted two letters from friends testifying to his brief relationship with a man whilst in the UK - and therefore to his sexuality - but these were dismissed 18 September by UKBA because they were not submitted with photo ID or other evidence about the friends testimony. We understand that there are others willing to testify about his sexuality.

One of those testifying was Burundian Sherinah Mukasi, whose identification we have sighted. Her sister is a friend of Mugwera's mother and she has been friends with him since he arrived. She knows he is gay and met Mugwera's then boyfriend at a party thrown by her sister.

Mugwera says that he has not been well served. He says that on making his claim he was dispersed (sent) to live in Birmingham and a lawyer provided who did not make efforts to secure evidence which could potentially have convinced a judge, as shown by Mugwera's efforts subsequent to the Immigration Tribunal appearance, by himself, to secure evidence as to his sexuality.

It is unclear from the evidence available to me that Mugwera is gay however it appears that he may not have been well-advised and has not been given a sufficient opportunity to support his claim. Both the judge's decision and the UKBA's makes assumptions about what Mugwera would provide with his claim which Mugwera appears to not realise.

Stonewall's report 'No going back' details why LGBT asylum seekers may be fearful of authorities and in interview not present a complete story. UKBA guidance (see Asylum Policy Instruction (API) published in October 2010) reflects these findings and says that consideration should be made of the traumatised state in which someone may be telling their story:

A common element in the experience of many LGBT applicants is having to keep aspects and sometimes large parts of their lives secret. This may be in response to societal pressure, explicit or implicit hostility and discrimination, and/or criminal sanctions.

Lesbian and gay applicants may feel a strong sense of shame and stigma about their sexual orientation and may feel that persecution they have experienced was caused by this identity. They may also come from cultures where they have never openly discussed their sexual orientation.

For these reasons lesbian and gay asylum seekers may struggle to talk openly about their sexual orientation. An open and reassuring environment will help to establish trust between the interviewer and the claimant, and should help the full disclosure of sensitive and personal information

The judge's decision was that Mugwera would live discreetly in order to not upset his family - therefore the Supreme Court rules were invoked and protection was not needed. The UKBA guidance states that:

If an individual chooses to live discreetly because s/he wants to avoid embarrassment or distress to his or her family and friends s/he will not be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution and will not qualify for asylum. This is because s/he has adopted a lifestyle to cope with social pressures and not because s/he fears persecution due to his or her sexual orientation. If an individual chooses to live discreetly because s/he fears persecution if s/he were to live as openly gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender then s/he will have a well founded fear and should be granted asylum.

The judgment that Mugwera would be voluntarily discreet is not based on any statement by Mugwera in documents we have sighted.

Given the serious question mark over whether Mugwera is gay and given the threats claimed from his family and community, within the context of a worsening and deadly situation for gay people in Uganda, I believe it is unsafe to remove him. He needs new advice and another opportunity to present his case.

Related articles

• How the Home Office is misusing law in gay Ugandan asylum seeker case (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• UK's removal of gay tortured, imprisoned Ugandan stopped at last moment (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Ugandan gay refugee recounts horror of imprisonment (madikazemi.blogspot.com)

Human rights defenders need solidarity from all parts of Europe when repressed by their governments

Destroyed Azeri human rights group office

By Thomas Hammarberg

The clampdown on human rights defenders in Belarus continues unabated. In early August, Ales Bialiatski, the chair of the Human Rights Centre Viasna and vice-President of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), was arrested. He is still being held in pre-trial detention. Activists who have demonstrated for his release have been summoned by the police and one of them is awaiting trial.

Viasna has been at the forefront of human rights defence in Belarus for years. The detention of Ales Bialiatski and the current criminal investigation process are seriously jeopardising the organisation’s activities to the detriment of victims of human rights violations, who have come to depend on the assistance provided by Viasna.

Another sad example has been reported from Azerbaijan. In mid-August, bulldozers demolished a building in Baku where several human rights organisations were located, including the Office of the Institute for Peace and Democracy led by Leyla Yunus. This demolition took place in the evening, despite a court decision temporarily prohibiting the destruction of the building.

As the house was torn down without any prior notification the persons who worked there were unable to salvage any papers, computers or other working materials. It is generally believed that the action was directed towards Leyla Yunus, who has been vocal in denouncing corruption and forced evictions in Azerbaijan.

Rights that protect and enable the work 

The importance of the work of human rights defenders is recognised in international conventions. The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders lists several fundamental rights necessary for the work of human rights defenders, such as freedom of association, peaceful assembly, expression and opinion, the right to be protected and the right to effective remedy. Many of these rights are also enshrined in other binding human rights treaties of the UN, in the European Convention on Human Rights and in the OSCE commitments.
Yet reports about breaches of these standards continue to reach me. Authorities can obstruct the work of human rights defenders by making it difficult to register organisations or by creating burdensome reporting and financial requirements. Hindering access to funding through excessively cumbersome procedures is another method which is frequently employed.

Viasna, for example, was dissolved in 2003 and has since then been denied the possibility to re-register. Belarusian legislation outlaws the operation of unregistered organisations and criminalises the activities of their individual members – a clear breach of international standards. In 2007, the UN Human Rights Committee concluded that Viasna’s dissolution was a violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (article 22).

Denial of right to receive funding 

The Belarusian authorities are now accusing Ales Bialiatski of “concealment of profits on an especially large scale”. They are using information provided by official institutions in Vilnius and Warsaw about bank accounts established in the name of Bialiatski, to which foreign donors have been able to send contributions.

The right to access funding is protected in international and regional human rights treaties. The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders states that everyone has the right “to solicit, receive and utilize resources for the express purpose of promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms through peaceful means”.

I know that the governments in Vilnius and Warsaw regret that the protection of human rights defenders’ integrity and work was not taken into account when information was provided to the Belarusian authorities and that they are now trying to limit the damage.

Sadly, this unintended mistake is being used in the case against Ales Bialiatski who is threatened with a long prison sentence. And he is not the only victim of policies to prevent voluntary solidarity efforts for those who suffer human rights violations.

Governments have a primary responsibility 

It is therefore particularly important that the protection of the safety of human rights defenders be reaffirmed as a crucial standard. Whenever this universally agreed undertaking is abrogated in one state, governments in other countries – including Council of Europe member states – must react.

Thomas Hammarberg is the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights

Related articles

• Azerbaijan's Eurovision welcome for gays questioned again (madikazemi.blogspot.com)
• Poland apologizes for exposing Belarusian activist (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• The snitches of Vilnius (economist.com)