Video: Ahmadinejad: 'No, still no gays in Iran'

Mocked at London Pride 2008

By Paul Canning

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was questioned yesterday by CNN about his infamous address at Columbia University in 2007.

Asked a question in 2007 about executions for sodomy in Iran, Ahmadinejad attempted to deflect to the death penalty in the United States. But moderator Dean Coatsworth pressed him and Ahmadinejad said:

"In Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country. We don’t have that in our country. In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I do not know who has told you that we have it."

Ahmadinejad was then booed by the audience.

Yesterday, he didn't try to deflect CNN's question, saying:

"My position hasn't changed."

"In Iran, homosexuality is looked down upon as an ugly deed. Perhaps there are those who engage in such activities and you may be in contact with them and more aware of them. But in Iranian society such activities, thoughts, and behaviors are shameful. Therefore, these are not known elements within Iranian society."

"Rest assured, this is one of the ugliest behaviors in our society. It is against divine will, divine teachings of any and every faith, and it is certainly at the detriment of humans and humanity. But as the government, I cannot go in the street and stop my population and ask them about specific orientation, so my position is clear about that."

Ahmadinejad's 2007 comments have been much mocked and Iranian LGBT have directly answered them.

In May, Iranian gay refugees marched in Ankara carrying placards with the slogans "Ahmadinejad, we’re here!" "Iranian queers will not keep silent anymore!" and "Iranian queers, we’re altogether now!."

In 2008, the Iranian asylum seeker Mehdi Kazemi - who this website was established to campaign for - wrote:

I do exist as an Iranian homosexual

I have got very surprised, very angry of this article and I do not understand really what is point of President of Iran. If Iran do not have any homosexual then I do not understand who I am then because I am an Iranian Gay and I have so many problem back my country where is Iran because of my sexual orientation

my life is in danger in Iran then what is that?

What is the piont of seeking asylum for Iranian Homosexual? They do not want to leave their country, family, friends,...... . Why is that? They put everything behind theirself to go to another country that they anything about it.

And what is the piont of tourting, killing, .... of Homosexual if there is not?????!!!!

My purpose of this letter is to kind of answering President Ahmadinejad and to say that I do exist as an Iranian homosexual and it does not matter where I am.

Related articles

• Are a third of young Iranian men having anal sex? With each other? (madikazemi.blogspot.com) 
• Iranian President mocked at London Pride (madikazemi.blogspot.com)  
• Video: “Ahmadinejad! We’re right here!” LGBT Iranian asylum seekers march in Ankara (madikazemi.blogspot.com) 

Never mind Latvian gay rights and the EU, what about Iraq's pogrom of gays?

Source: Left Foot Forward

By Paul Canning

Stonewall and Ben Bradshaw's talking points got another outing last week and scored what must have pleased both them and Gay Times no end, a 'gotcha' moment for Cameron on gay issues.

What is frustrating as political leaders do these rare interviews on gay issues is that there's one area where their glaring failure rarely gets questioned: LGBT asylum and - allied to that - support for LGBT in those parts of the world where they are most at threat.

The UK has a terrible record with case-after-case of people fleeing torture, arrest, 'honour' killing and the like needing campaigning and years of expensive legal effort to force the Home Office to grant them sanctuary.

Harriet Harman was booed at the London Pride rally two years ago following the well-publicised case of Mehdi Kazemi. The teenage Iranian had seen his boyfriend murdered by the Mullas but it took a massive campaign before Jacqui Smith relented. Home Office Minister Lord West actually said that "we do not consider that there is systematic persecution of gay men in Iran."

Campaigners have sought Home Office changes for years to little effect.

Only last month the High Court blocked the government from deporting a Ugandan lesbian who was on a police list.

Now we have the leader of Iraqi LGBT, an incredibly brave man who has saved countless lives from the pogroms in Iraq, being denied asylum and hence travel rights - so he can take up American and European offers to talk with politicians and visit TV studios.

Yet only Johann Hari's recent interviews of Brown, Cameron and Clegg for the Independent has mentioned asylum. This produced the irony of Cameron sounding more liberal than Brown as Hari asked the same question about the policy of telling people to 'go home and be discrete'. It also produced a bizarre Daily Mail headline 'Cameron: Gay refugees from Africa should be given asylum in UK' - when Africa hadn't been mentioned.

But Hari did the same thing as other gay journalists and zoomed in on the Conservative's relationship to eastern European homophobes.

Those journalists' priorities match those of gay and lesbian Labour MPs and Labour LGBT. This when we have executions in Iran, a 'kill the gays' bill in Uganda and looming repression in the rest of Africa plus that ongoing pogrom in Iraq. None of those MPs has raised a finger to help (yes Brown did complain to Museveni but one isolated swallow doesn't make a summer).

The Foreign Office proudly trumpets its gay rights work but its almost entirely European. It's second Human Rights report has some information about Iraq - sourced from the same person Labour's Home Office says does not have a "compelling" case. Only Labour's Michael Cashman MEP has a record to be proud of on international LGBT issues.

By contrast look at what's happening in the US State Department through Hillary Clinton's leadership on truly international gay rights work.

As the booing of Harman showed LGBT voters are aware of Labour's big failing on LGBT asylum. And no ammount of spin helped by gay journalists and pointing at the Tories can cover up the big homophobic stink emanating from the Home Office.

Mehdi Kazemi: a reminder

Downing Street response to LGBT asylum petition

Image by Mrs. Knook via Flickr

We received a petition asking:

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to urgently review the way LGBT asylum seekers are treated.”

Details of Petition

“In the light of the cases of Pegah Emembakhsh and Mehdi Kazemi, Iranian LGBT asylum seekers, who sought asylum in the UK, we call upon the Prime Minister for an urgent review of the treatment of all LGBT asylum seekers. In particular we think that the following are needed for fair treatment - 1. Compulsory training for all asylum staff on sexual-orientation and trans-awareness. 2. Explicit instructions to all immigration and asylum staff, and asylum judges, that homophobic and transphobic persecution are legitimate grounds for granting asylum. 3. Clearer and up-to-date guidance from the Home Office for asylum judges to reflect the accurate scale of LGBT persecution throughout the world using expert information from NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. 4. Legal-aid funding for asylum claims needs to be substantially increased.”

The Government’s response

Thank you for your e-petition requesting an urgent review the treatment of lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender (LGBT) asylum seekers.

In accordance with our international obligations, the Government is fully committed to providing protection to all individuals who need it.  We have backed this promise with a considerable investment in people and processes in order to deliver a fairer and faster asylum system.  This includes a 55 day foundation training programme for new asylum case owners followed by ongoing learning and development activities.  Consideration of applications from people expressing a fear of persecution on the grounds of being lesbian, gay, bisexual or a transgender person is explicitly covered in the training.  This is reinforced by clear written instructions for decision-makers.  Decision-makers are also supported by accurate, objective and regularly updated country specific information.  Similarly, Immigration Judges all receive full training in diversity and refugee law and carry out their assessment of refused claims impartially, on behalf of the courts.

Each asylum and human rights claim is considered on its individual merits in accordance with our obligations under the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).  Decision-makers in the UK Border Agency have clear instructions about the criteria they must apply and how they should reach a decision.  If an applicant demonstrates a need for international protection and they meet the definition of a refugee under the terms of the 1951 Convention, asylum is granted.  If they are otherwise vulnerable they may engage our obligations under the ECHR, in which case they will be granted Humanitarian Protection or Discretionary Leave.  If their application is refused, they have a right of appeal to the Asylum Immigration Tribunal or an opportunity to seek judicial review through the higher courts.  Asylum Instructions setting out the detailed procedures and criteria for deciding asylum applications are published on the UK Border Agency website at: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/guidance/asylumprocess/

To maintain a high standard of decision quality, a Quality Audit team assess 20% of decisions made across the regional asylum teams, using an assessment form designed jointly with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and feed back findings to decision-makers and managers.  The UNHCR currently conduct random peer reviews of the Quality Audit team’s assessments. We recognise that the conditions for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in some countries are such that there may be individuals who are able to demonstrate a need for international protection – instructions to decision-makers are clear that they may qualify for asylum on the grounds of persecution as a member of a particular social group.

However, we do not accept that there should be a presumption that each and every asylum seeker of a particular nationality who presents themselves as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender should automatically be afforded protection in the UK.  It is in keeping with the terms of the Refugee Convention that every case is assessed individually on the basis of all the available information against the Refugee Convention and ECHR criteria.

Legal aid funding is designed to help those who can least afford to pay to obtain legal advice, assistance and representation when necessary.  There is no nationality or residence qualification for receiving either civil or criminal legal aid.  The Legal Services Commission (LSC) administers the legal aid system in England and Wales.  The LSC is a non-departmental public body sponsored by the Ministry of Justice.  We do not believe that the current funding arrangements are inadequate.

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.

Yet another Ministerial kick in the teeth for LGBT asylum

Immigration Minister Phil Woolas has condemned websites like this, groups like UK Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group, Churches like Manchester MCC and the thousands of ordinary people who helped save Mehdi Kazemi.

Here's what he said:

In Britain, asylum seekers are given "false hope" by NGOs and migration lawyers. "By giving false hope and by undermining the legal system [they] actually cause more harm than they do good."

So he believes that Britain's asylum system is exploited by migration lawyers and NGOs? "The system is played by migration lawyers and NGOs to the nth degree." In one case, an asylum seeker won after six layers of appeal. "That person has no right to be in this country but I'm sure that there is an industry out there that is a vested interest." He jabs his finger as he recounts desperate asylum seekers visiting his constituency office. "One lady showed me the scars on her thighs from where the soldiers had raped her, so I know, but I cannot take a decision on that lady's behalf if I am," he almost shouts the word, "fogged by cases that are misusing the law." The European Convention on Human Rights, he says, "is meant to protect people from persecution. It is not meant to be an open-borders immigration policy."

Woolas hopes that his willingness to say what many on the left consider unsayable will help shatter the "glass wall" he sees between politicians and ordinary people. He walks out of the sleek glass of the Home Office building and, when he stands in front of an old doorway to have his picture taken, he says he feels "like a nightclub bouncer". He points at me, jokingly in character. "You can't come in," he barks. It seems to come naturally to him.

What a nasty piece of work.

EU-Regulations and Asylum Issues

Image by centralasian via Flickr

Source: ILGA-Europe

Workshop held at the ILGA Europe Annual Conference , Vienna, 30 October - 2 November 2008

By Sabine Jansen, COC Netherlands

I would like to start with some explanation and a few remarks on the Conventions that apply to LGBT asylum seekers in Europe. After that I will give two examples of issues in asylum policy that form specific obstacles to LGBT people. Then I will say something about two recent cases that are important for the Netherlands and maybe for other European countries as well.

Convention matters

In theory LGBT asylum seekers who flee for reasons related to their sexual orientation or their gender identity in most European countries could qualify for asylum. In the Netherlands this is case-law since 1981. There are two possible ways.

To qualify for a refugee-status under the 1951 Refugee Convention (the Geneva Convention) one should have a well-founded fear of being persecuted for one of the grounds mentioned in this convention: race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group. Although ‘Sexual orientation’ or ‘gender identity’ are not explicitly mentioned in the Convention, LGBT people can be seen as ‘members of a particular social group’, who share a common characteristic and have a distinct identity due to the perception in the society of origin. On this ground they should be protected against persecution by the Refugee  Convention. 

The second way in which LGBT people could obtain asylum is a status based on Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, that forbids to send someone to a situation where he or she has a ‘real risk’ of being subjected to ‘torture or an inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’. This is also called ‘subsidiary protection’.

These two asylum statuses are also described in the EU Refugee Status Directive, that has been adopted by the EU member states and came into force in 2004.[1] It contains minimum standards: states are allowed to give more protection than is prescribed by the Directive.

The Directive should have been implemented in your national legislation since October 10th 2006. Now that this date has expired, people can call upon the Directive itself in the national procedures. The national judge should then apply European law.

The Refugee Directive says in Article 10 explicitly that ‘depending on the circumstances in the country of origin, a particular social group might include a group based on a common characteristic of sexual orientation.’ National legislation of the EU member states must therefore include in the ground ‘particular social group’ the possibility of groups based on sexual orientation .

Article 10 continues: ‘Sexual orientation cannot be understood to include acts considered to be criminal in accordance with national law of the Member States.’ I do not understand the intention of this phrase. It resembles Country Reports with sentences like: ‘Homosexual acts are punishable by law, the penalty is three years of imprisonment. The penalty on homosexual acts with a minor against his will is seven years.’ We would call this ‘rape’ or ‘child abuse’ instead of homosexuality. This kind of information does not belong in a Country Report chapter on the situation of LGBT people. Why would the Directive describe criminal sexual orientation acts? To exclude criminal asylum seekers one could apply other articles of the Directive.

When I did research on the legal position of homosexual asylum seekers in the Netherlands, I identified several problems, of which I will now describe two examples. If you want more information about these issues, I could send you the article I wrote, although an extra problem is, that it is in Dutch.[2]

State protection against non-state actors

Sometimes LGBT people flee their country of origin, because they are persecuted directly by the authorities. But more often the persecutors are so-called ‘non-state actors’, family, neighbours etc. For a long time the idea was that a real refugee is someone who is politically active and persecuted by the state. So women and LGBTs, who often flee because of violence by sexist or homophobic non-state agents, did not fit this image. It is very important that the Directive explicitly recognizes non-state actors as actors of persecution or serious harm.

When a LGBT person is so mistreated by non-state actors that he or she decides to leave the country in search of safety elsewhere, one of the questions that is posed by the Immigration officer is: ‘Did you go to the local authorities to ask for protection?’ Sometimes the answer is: ‘Yes, but they refused to help me’ and sometimes the answer is: ‘No, because I am afraid of the police’.

A gay man from Algeria fled to the Netherlands after he was gang-raped by fifteen ‘civilians’. His asylum claim was refused, because he should have asked the Algerian police to protect him. He did not do so, because a few years earlier he was raped by a police officer and in Algeria homosexuality is punishable with three years imprisonment. According to Dutch Immigration officers the first rapist was just one policeman and he could have asked help from other or higher authorities. It’s true that homosexual acts are criminal in Algeria, they argued, but rape is too. Finally they granted him asylum, but this took almost four years of procedures.

In general, people fleeing because of persecution by non-state actors are supposed to seek protection in their home state first. Though in my opinion it is not reasonable to expect from an LGBT person to turn to the police for protection in a country where homosexuality is a crime or where the general atmosphere is homophobic.

Article 6 of the Refugee Directive states that actors of persecution include non-state actors, ‘if it can be demonstrated that the State is unable or unwilling to provide protection’. But who has to demonstrate this, on whose shoulders is the burden of proof? The general answer is: ‘the asylum seeker’, but I think the burden of proof should be on the receiving state. The state should first demonstrate that the authorities of the country of origin are in general able and willing to offer protection to LGBT people, before expecting the asylum seeker to turn to the police.

There is support for this idea in the Refugee Directive. Article 7 of the Directive says that protection is generally provided, when the state takes reasonable steps to prevent the persecution. The state should operate ‘an effective legal system for the detection, prosecution and punishment of acts constituting persecution’ and the applicant should have access to such protection. In homophobic societies this kind of protection will seldom be available. So, when someone was persecuted by homophobic non-state actors in the state of origin, you could try to refer to the Directive.

The right to privacy or private life

In 1981 the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decided that the provision that criminalized homosexuality in Northern Ireland was a violation of the right to privacy in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).[3] This decision was followed by similar judgements on the criminalization of homosexuality in Ireland and Cyprus.[4]

The only time a gay asylum case was decided upon by the European Court of Human Rights was in 2004 when the Court judged the case of a gay man from Iran who sought asylum in the UK. The Court rejected his claim at the right to private life in Article 8 of the Convention. Although homosexuality is a crime in Iran, this does not mean that deportation of a person to this country is a violation of Article 3 or 8 of the ECHR. Iran is outside the European Union and this country is not a party to the European Convention.[5]

Decision-makers sometimes argue that gay people will not be persecuted as long as they act discreetly or are not openly gay. And of course, if all LGBT people would stay in the closet completely, there would probably be no harassing, rape, ill-treatment, murder, torture or discrimination of LGBTs. The Netherlands recently adopted the policy not to use this argument anymore, but for instance the UK still does: The British Home Secretary said that ‘Gay and lesbian asylum-seekers can be safely deported to Iran as long as they live their lives "discreetly".’[6]

The advice to act discreetly upon return is a violation of  the right to privacy and ‘the right to privacy includes the choice to disclose or not to disclose information relating to one’s sexual orientation or gender identity’, as the Yogyakarta principles state.[7] The Michigan Guidelines say: An individual shall not be expected to deny his or her protected identity or beliefs in order to avoid coming to the attention of the state or non-governmental agent of persecution.[8]

In the case Bensaid v. UK (2001) the European Court of Human Rights stated that ‘private life’ is a broad term and that gender identification, name, sexual orientation and sexual life are important elements of the personal sphere protected by Article 8 ECHR. It might be a good idea for people in the UK to start a procedure at the ECHR stating that the claim to act discrete is a violation of the right to privacy protected by article 8 ECHR. And the Dutch Government should convince other European members to follow their policy not to expect LGBT people to live discreetly.

Two recent cases

A case that attracted a lot of attention in the EU was the case of Mehdi Kazemi from Iran. He  first applied for asylum in the UK, after he had heard that his boyfriend was executed in Iran and he feared the same fate. Nevertheless, his case was refused. Then he fled to the Netherlands. The Netherlands has the policy to grant asylum to all LGBT people from Iran, but Mr. Kazemi’s asylum claim was refused again because of the Dublin Convention, which prevents application for asylum in more than one EU country. He was sent back to the UK. After a lot of protests and demonstrations from several LGBT-organisations in the UK and the Netherlands and a resolution from the European Parliament, Kazemi was finally granted asylum in the UK. To avoid this kind of Dublin cases in the future the Dutch Government should export the policy to grant asylum to LGBT people from Iran.

There was also the case of the Iranian lesbian Pegah Emambakhsh, whose partner was sentenced to death by stoning. The last report on her situation dates from last March, when she was still in the UK, fearing deportation to Iran. I wonder if anybody knows what has happened to her? 

Last year the case of mr. Salah Sheekh from Somalia against the Netherlands was decided upon by the European Court of Human Rights.[9] He won the case because according to the Court his expulsion to Somalia would be in violation of article 3 of the Convention. Mr Sheekh was a member of the Somali clan of the Ashraf, and as a result of this the Netherlands had to change the asylum-policy. We now have two new categories: ‘vulnerable minority groups’ and ‘groups at risk’. Vulnerable minority groups are for instance single women in Afghanistan and Christians in Iraq. Their burden of proof is much lower. A few days ago, in a meeting with Dutch government officials we heard that they plan to recognize homosexuals from Iraq and Afghanistan as ‘groups at risk’. If these asylum seekers  pass an individual examination with limited evidence, they will get a refugee-status. So that is good news, although it has a somewhat bitter taste, because very recently the categorical protection for asylum seekers from Central Iraq was ended.

This summer the European Commission presented a policy plan on asylum, as part of the creation of a Common European Asylum System (CEAS). One of the overarching objectives of this CEAS is to incorporate gender considerations and take into account the special needs of vulnerable groups. I don’t know if ILGA is already creating LGBT input in this harmonisation process, but I think this would be a good idea.

I would like to end with a subject that is, as far as I know, in the Netherlands hardly an issue: Immigration sometimes does not believe someone to be gay. Here in Vienna for instance I heard that lesbian women from Zimbabwe are denied asylum in the UK, because they have children and for that reason are not believed to be gay. And I also heard the story of a man from Azerbaijan, who sought asylum in the Czech republic. To test his gayness the Czech authorities showed him porn-videos, while putting a device around his penis, to measure his reaction to the porn. This is a gross violation of human rights and if this is true, human rights organisations should send a fierce protest to the Czech authorities.

Anyhow, I would be very interested to hear how the situation of LGBT asylum seekers is in other EU-countries. So I hope we can exchange ideas and experiences in this workshop or during this conference.

[1] Directive 2004/83/EC on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or

stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of

the protection granted, (2004) OJ L304/12.

[2] ‘Op de vlucht voor homohaat, over discriminatie en discretie’, Nieuwsbrief Asiel- en Vluchtelingenrecht 2006, nr. 3, p. 124-146.

[3] ECHR, Dudgeon v. United Kingdom, 22 October 1981, 7525/76.

[4] ECHR, Norris v. Ireland, 26 October 1988, 10581/83; ECHR, Modinos v. Cyprus, 22 April 1993, 15070/89.

[5] ECHR, F. v. United Kingdom, 22 June 2004, 17341/03.

[6] The Independent, 23 June 2008.

[7] The Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Human Rights Law in relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, March 2007.

[8] The Michigan Guidelines on Nexus to a Convention Ground, University of Michigan Law School, Ann Arbor USA, March 2001.

[9] Salah Sheekh v. The Netherlands, 11 January 2007, 1948/04.

Tory MP attacks Home Secretary over Iran comments

Source: PinkNews

The Chairman of the Conservative Party's Human Rights Commission has added his voice to the chorus of criticism of Jacqui Smith after she claimed that gay people are in no danger in Iran as long as they are "discreet."

Stephen Crabb MP said that the Iranian regime's record of brutality towards sexual minorities is "dreadful" and the Islamic nation regularly uses torture and the death penalty.

Ms Smith, the Home Secretary, said in a letter to Lib Dem peer Lord Roberts of Llandudno that in Iran "the evidence does not show a real risk of discovery of or adverse action against gay and lesbian people who are discreet about their sexual orientation."

Mr Crabb said that most "fair-minded people" will be appalled by her comments.

"The Iranian regime has a dreadful track-record when it comes to the treatment of homosexuals and other minority groups and is more than willing to use torture and the death sentence to punish offenders.

"Asking minorities to live their lives discreetly is to give in to the tyrants and bullies who sustain their positions through fear and coerced conformity.

"It demonstrates both an unelevated view of the importance of human rights and cowardice in championing our own system of values."

The Green party has also criticised her and attacked the "macho posturing" of the Home Office.
Phelim Mac Cafferty, media spokesperson for LGBT Greens said:

"Jacqui Smith is playing a dangerous game with the lives of Iranian LGBT refugees: effectively she's trying to rubbish the argument that LGBT people are being persecuted for their sexuality in Iran.

"Her claim that as long as people are "discreet" a regime notorious for its treatment of LGBT people will somehow stop persecuting them is misled at best and homicidal at worst.

"Instead of this macho posturing from the Home Office on keeping asylum figures down, we desperately need a Home Secretary prepared to look the Iranian regime in the eyes and stand up for what’s right for LGBT people."

Stonewall chief executive Ben Summerskill had praised the Home Secretary earlier this year when she reviewed the case of Mehdi Kazemi.

The 20-year-old was due to be returned to Iran, where he claimed his boyfriend had been executed and police had a warrant for his arrest on homosexuality charges. He was given leave to remain in the UK.

Today he told The Independent:

"You only have to listen to people who were terrorised by the Metropolitan Police in the 1950s and 1960s to know that telling gay people to live discreetly is quixotic."

Respected human rights groups such as Amnesty and Human Rights Watch have documented scores of cases of Iranian gay men and lesbians being targeted, and sometimes executed, for homosexual behaviour.

Campaign group gayasylumuk called the Home Secretary's comments outrageous, shameful, inhumane and anti-gay and called for protesters to target the Prime Minister and the Labour party.

"We hope that gay and lesbian Labour voters in particular will consider changing their vote if the policy isn't changed before the next election," said spokesperson Paul Canning.

"This is one way to get the message through on their hypocrisy regarding lesbian and gay rights issues — when embassies in other countries are flying the rainbow flag they aren't doing this in Tehran, Kingston or Kampala."

In 2005 Iran sparked international outrage when it publicly executed two teenage boys.
Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni were hanged because according to the regime they were rapists, however gay campaigners insist the boys were killed under Sharia law for the crime of homosexuality.

At first it was claimed by Iranian officials that they were aged 18 and 19.

The best evidence is that both youths were aged 17 when they were executed and therefore minors, aged 15 or 16, at the time of their alleged crimes.

In March Lib Dem peer Lord Avebury drew to the government's attention the case of Makwan Mouloudzadeh, a 20-year-old who was executed in December 2007 for a homosexual offence allegedly committed when he was 13.

Last year information was released by the Foreign and Commonwealth office regarding the execution of gays in Iran.

The documentation took the form of correspondence sent between embassies throughout the EU and dates back as far as May 2005.

It refers specifically to the case of Mahmoud and Ayaz.

It also shows that although the two boys may not have been executed solely because of the homosexual aspect for the crime, the punishment was carried out "before all legal means to avoid the execution had been exhausted."

A further conversation between a Parliamentary Union and the Iranian Majles (legislative body) in May 2007 showed that "according to Islam gays and lesbianism were not permitted. He [an Iranian representative] said that if homosexual activity is in private there is no problem, but those in overt activity should be executed."

According to the transcript he initially said "torture" but changed the wording to "execution."

He also argued that "homosexuality is against human nature" and that "humans are here to reproduce. Homosexuals do not reproduce."

According to Iranian human rights campaigners, more than 4,000 lesbians and gay men have been executed since the Ayatollahs seized power in 1979.

• Full transcripts of the FCO documents

Mehdi reaction in the House of Lords

22nd May in the House of Lords

Nb: our emphasis

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: My Lords, I want to express my appreciation of the Home Secretary’s action in giving asylum to Mehdi Kazemi, the young man who was to be forcefully removed to Iran. I am told that that happened yesterday. In view of what is going on in Iran and the possible treatment of those who are repatriated or forcibly removed from here, could there not be a total moratorium on the removal of failed asylum seekers to Iran?

Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, let me return the compliment to the noble Lord and to those in this House who have continuously raised the issue of Mehdi Kazemi. That was instrumental in the Home Secretary’s reconsideration of the case and the decision to grant him a five-year initial stay here in the UK. Equally, however, noble Lords will recognise that we must preserve the right to deal with these matters on a case-by case-basis. That is at the heart of our approach to asylum.

Letter of thanks from Mehdi

I found out on Monday 19th of May 2008 that the government had granted me refugee status for the next five years. I am so happy about this and I just want to say thank you to all the people of Britain, The Netherlands, Italy and across Europe, Canada, America and the world, who have shown their concern for me, who have given me the support that I really needed and who have worked very hard to help me through difficult times and to get me to where I am now. I wouldn’t be alive if hadn’t been for your help. I will never forget everything that you have done.

I also want to say thank you to all the organisations who campaigned on my behalf, especially the EveryOne Group, Dutch COC, IRQO and Human Rights Watch, to UK Gay News and The Independent newspaper who chose to tell my story and to raise awareness of my plight. Thank you to the Members of Parliament in the UK, the Netherlands, in particular Mr Boris van der Ham, and the EU, Marco Cappato, Marco Pannella, Sophia in 't Veld and especially Mr Michael Cashman MEP, who asked the UK government to grant me asylum. I have written a separate letter to the Home Secretary to thank her for granting me refugee status, and to the Members of the British, Dutch and European Parliaments to thank them for their help. Thank you to Mr B.A Palm who represented me in The Netherlands and to my representative in this country, Gabriella Bettiga at Lawrence Lupin Solicitors, who helped me to make a fresh claim for asylum.

I would also like to say some very special thanks. I would like to say thank you to my local MP, Mr Simon Hughes, and his team who gave me the chance to live and made a miracle happen when he heard that my life was in serious danger and asked the Home Office to suspend my deportation in December 2006. I would not be here if it hadn’t been for his intervention. He was here for me then and he was here for me again when I was eventually sent back to the UK in April this year. I do not know if I would have been granted my refugee status without him.
I also wish to say the biggest thank you to my uncles, for all their support, for accepting me for who I am, for their hard work, for everything they’ve done for me, and most of all for their love.

I am so lucky to have them as my uncles and I am so proud of them.

Life has been very hard for me ever since I heard that my former boyfriend had been executed. I was very scared about what would happen to me and this is why I claimed asylum in the UK. I knew that the people of this country accepted homosexuality and that the government gave equal rights to people regardless of their sexuality. So when my asylum claim was refused I was shocked and very disappointed. I had expected more. I had expected to be given the same rights as people here. I thought the government would understand the very difficult situation that I was in.

I couldn’t understand why my claim was refused and then I felt that the judge didn’t listen to me at my appeal. I was detained very soon after my appeal was dismissed and things happened very quickly. One minute I was still going to school in Brighton and the next minute I was told that they had signed a deportation order against me and I would be going back in Iran a few days later. I was devastated and I felt that I was only one step away from death. I was told that I could appeal against the decision to deport me once I was back in Iran, but I thought, how can this be possible? Who will appeal? My dead body? I knew that only a miracle could save me then.

At this point, my uncle, with whom I had originally lived with when I arrived in the UK, contacted the local MP, Simon Hughes. He managed to suspend the deportation order just in time. I couldn’t believe that I had been given another chance. I was temporarily released but I was very scared that I would be in the same situation again just a few months later. I realised that I was not safe in the UK so I decided to flee. I had hoped to go to Canada, but I was arrested in the Czech Republic, taken to Germany and then I escaped again to Holland. I had heard that Holland had a special concession for gay Iranian asylum seekers and that they had a fairer law.

I spent about a year in Holland after I claimed asylum there. It was a very difficult year for me. Asylum seekers have no real rights. All you are allowed to be is an asylum seeker. You cannot study, or work, or do anything. You are only allowed to breathe. I did meet some very kind people in the Netherlands who went out of their way to help me and who became good friends. I would like to go back to see them some time soon. Eventually my asylum claim was refused again, this time in Holland, because under the European Regulation you have to be given asylum in the first country that you arrive in. I was very upset about this decision and I became very depressed. I thought, at least I have tried to save my life, I tried everything that I could but it didn’t work, and you can’t do anymore than that. I had had enough. I just wanted everything to be over. I didn’t want to live anymore.

I was returned to the UK in April. I was very scared but I was so pleased to see my uncles again. I had missed them very much. I was also very grateful and reassured by my local MP, Simon, who told me he would do everything he could to help. My family and I met with him very soon after I came back to the UK and he took the time to really listen to me. He asked me about what I had been through and he explained that he would tell the Home Office and the government why I should be allowed to stay in this country. He put me in touch with the solicitors who helped me to make a new claim for asylum. I am so grateful to Gabriella at Lawrence Lupin Solicitors for all her hard work and all the help she gave me. Simon also wrote a letter to the Home Office in support of my claim. I hadn’t expected to receive so much help and I really felt that there were people here who were fighting my corner.

I was told on Monday that the government had granted me refugee status. I cannot really say how good I feel. It’s the best news I have ever had. I am relieved and just very very happy. I feel that I can start to live again, to plan my life and my future. I can pick up where I left off when my situation became so difficult a couple of years ago. So I am back now and living with one of my uncles. I am making plans to continue with my studies. I would really like to go to university to study Pharmacology.

I am very much looking forward to the future and to doing all the things I thought I would no longer be able to do. But I do miss my family and my friends back at home, and I miss Iran. It is where I come from, Iran is my country and I think it is very sad that people there do not have the same rights as they do in this country and that this means I cannot live there at the moment. I hope that one day I will be safe and that I can live in my country again. I hope that other people in similar situations to mine will have the same rights, that they will no longer fear for their lives and they will have the freedom to live as they want to live and be who they are regardless of their sexuality.

But for now, I am so grateful to be here and to be safe. I want to say thank you again to the people of Britain, The Netherlands, Italy and across Europe, Canada, America and the world for their understanding, for giving me the right to live and to be who I am and who I want to be.

I do not want to say any more than this at the moment and I do not want the media to contact me because I would like to protect my life, my safety and my security. I just want to say thank you.

Mehdi

Disgraceful sexual persecution

Independent Editorial

It is good news that Mehdi Kazemi, who faces the death penalty in Iran merely for being gay, has finally been granted asylum in the UK. But the news is not good enough. Mr Kazemi came to London to study in 2005, but the following year learned that his former boyfriend had been executed for sodomy – and that before he was hanged, he named Mr Kazemi as his partner. Then began his long struggle to find sanctuary.

His application for asylum was rejected by the UK on the grounds that, while it was conceded that Iran executes homosexuals, there was no "systematic" repression of gay men and lesbians.
But when Mr Kazemi fled to the Netherlands to seek asylum there, his application was rejected on the same grounds; no one, he was told, was executed "solely" because they were gay; he would be safe in Iran if he was discreet about his sexuality. This was a disgraceful judgment. Homosexuality is illegal in many Muslim countries, but in Iran the punishments for same-sex relations between consenting adults in private are particularly brutal.

On the testimony of "four righteous men", homosexuals are slowly strangled by being hanged in public from cranes in the street. Human rights groups estimate that some 4,000 gay men and lesbians, some as young as the age of 15, have been executed in the past 30 years. Many more have been given beatings, 100 lashes. In Iran no public discussion of homosexuality is allowed, gay groups are banned and any political party that supports gay rights has its candidates removed from the ballot paper. It is true that the regime often adds sodomy to the list of crimes of which it accuses political dissidents but that does not lessen Iran's offence, rather it increases it.

The idea that Britain will be swamped with bogus asylum-seekers from Iran falsely claiming to be gay is risible.

Mehdi Kazemi, and others like him whose only crime is their sexuality, should not be forced to depend upon individual acts of compassion by the Home Secretary. This country needs something more systematic. That should begin with a moratorium on the deportation of asylum-seekers to Iran.

This is one aspect of asylum policy which does not need prevarication posing as a government review.

Action should be taken immediately to declare that those fleeing Iran, and certain other countries, on grounds of sexual persecution will not be forced to return to their homelands. Not to do so would be tantamount to Britain endorsing state-sanctioned murder on grounds of sexuality. The Government should announce a change in the application of the rules at once.

Seeking sanctuary from persecution

by Caroline Lucas MEP

Today has consisted of a series of seemingly endless meetings in Strasbourg, on issues such as environmental law and waste in the EU. I’ve ended the day on a high though, by giving an interview on BBC Southern Counties Radio about the decision by the government to save the gay Iranian man Mehdi Kazemi from deportation.

Kazemi came to the UK in 2005 to study in Brighton in the first instance and intended to return to Iran, before discovering the threat to his life after his former parnter was hanged. There had been an overwhelming consensus in the European Parliament for resolution B6-0111/2008 in March which expressed ’serious concern’ over the fate of Kazemi, recognising that Iran regularly detains, tortures and executes people on the basis of their sexuality. The case was even taken up by the House of Lords, where 60 members signed a letter to Jacqui Smith.

Homosexual acts have been considered a capital crime in Iran since the 1979 revolution that brought the Ayatollah Khomeini to power, and during a speech at Columbia University in September 2007, Prime Minister Ahmadinejad made the frankly tragic and even amusing claim that "in Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country".

It’s worth remembering that the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and in particular to Article 3 thereof, prohibits the removal, expulsion or extradition of persons to countries where there is a serious risk that they would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. So I hope this case sets a new precedent for people like Pegah Emambakhsh, an Iranian lesbian, whose future in the UK is yet to be decided.

COMMENT: A crack in the UK's asylum edifice

PinkNews

By Paul Canning • May 22, 2008 - 12:58

It's very hard for most British gay men and lesbians to imagine what it's like to grow up in a country like Iran.

To fear what you are and to have to act with care 24 hours a day, lest your family finds out and perhaps takes your life in a so-called 'honour killing,' or the state discovers you and tortures you.

So trying to understand the sheer torture of your boyfriend being discovered and executed, seeking safety from what you know is your certain, similar fate, in what you'd always thought was the 'civilised' West - and being disbelieved and rejected - is beyond most of us.

Imagine how much harder this would be when you are still a teenager. Most of us couldn't begin to.

But this has been the life experience of Mehdi Kazemi, still only 19 years old.

We all know the story - PinkNews.co.uk has been one of the few news outlets which has been keeping us informed of the case's twists and turns.

But there are many other 'cases' who have already been kicked out of Britain to unknown fates, who have committed suicide rather than be sent 'home' or shiver in fear today because this 'civilised' country leaves them 'hanging' for years before they learn their final fate.

In Holland their policy is to automatically grant 'leave to remain' to LGBT asylum seekers.

If they commit no crimes, after five years they can claim Dutch nationality.

Sweden has something similar — many other countries, including the United States, treat LGBT asylum seekers better than the UK.

For the UK, 'leave to remain' - what Mehdi has - doesn't necessarily mean that people can stay permanently.

As gay rights activist Peter Tatchell told CNN: At the end of five years [Mehdi] will have to go through the whole appeal process again."

The Dutch Liberal MP Boris van der Ham, who led parliamentary efforts to secure asylum in that country for Mehdi, made a point of finding out just how many gay people are 'flooding' into Holland under their policy.

He did this because the debate there, echoing what some say in the UK, had included that familiar right-wing claim: 'we'll be flooded'.

Six LGBT asylum seekers are expected over the next year and 38 to 40 in total since 2006.

In the UK the ukgayasylum group has about 25 people currently on its books.

These are tiny numbers and both the Dutch and Swedish experience proves that adopting a civilised policy doesn't result in so-called 'flooding'.

But it is clear from my information through back channels that the Home Office has dug in its heels, remains extremely keen to 'not set a precedent' and is influenced by such reactionary ideas.

In a statement issued to CNN the Home Office said:

"We keep cases under review where circumstances have changed and it has been decided that Mr. Kazemi should be granted leave to remain in the UK based on the particular facts of this case."

The truth is that the only circumstance which has changed is the publicity and that cannot be the actual reason otherwise many others, like the gay Syrian JoJo Yakob, who The Scotsman is backing, cannot be kicked out.

The normal sort of statement is such cases is one like this from another gay Iranian's case (my emphasis):

"On the evidence we find the appellant can reasonably be expected to tolerate the position on any return … For the reasons given the appellant's appeal remains dismissed."

This reflects the attitude shamelessly outlined by Home Office Minister Lord Spithead in the Lords at the height of the interest in Mehdi's case:

"We are not aware of any individual who has been executed in Iran in recent years solely on the grounds of homosexuality, and we do not consider that there is systematic persecution of gay men in Iran."

As the Mehdi campaign dragged on, as The Independent newspaper gave it front page coverage, as numerous Labour and other Members of Parliament lobbied, as the European Parliament passed a resolution, as US networks carried it on their evening news, the fear that he would indeed be deported regardless was very real. They have done it before.

As gayasylumuk's Omar Kuddas explains:

"He was almost deported at Christmas. They came for him at precisely the time when they thought it would be hardest to get lawyers and others out to defend him. This is how the Home Office behaves."

There have been others before Mehdi.

Last year the Italian Prime Minister contacted Gordon Brown to argue the case for Iranian lesbian Pegah Emambakash - all to no avail as she slipped from news coverage and is now on her last legal legs to save herself from deportation back to Tehran.

JoJo Yakob in Scotland has just suffered through the blatant homophobia of the Home Office on display at a tribunal and will only be safe if a judge is sympathetic and rejects that homophobic policy and practice for which Jacqui Smith and, ultimately, Gordon Brown are responsible.

is one of the many unsung heroes - gay and straight and from many countries - who have helped save Mehdi.

As you read the many claims of responsibility for 'Jacqui's u-turn' from politicians and some showboating organisations over the next few days bear that in mind.

The only reason that the government shifted in Mehdi's case was because it was all getting just too embarrassing for Gordon Brown.

Him, not Smith. And they hope that by granting leave to remain just to Mehdi, and by twisting their 'rules' in order to do it, that we'll all shut up.

They don't want a policy change and there is no doubt in my mind that the real reason is because they fear the Daily Mail and other agenda-setters and their 'hardline' against asylum seekers more than they fear a backlash from us, the LGBT community.

Tony Blair and David Blunkett set the 'quotas to fill' ball rolling, and Jacqui Smith is the latest to be carrying it through and damn the consequences.

They present one face to us citizens and another face - 'discretion' and blatant homophobia - to persecuted foreign LGBT who dare to claim asylum.

Worse, another government department - the Foreign Office - is out there preaching to other countries about human rights, including LGBT rights. The hypocrisy couldn't smell any stronger.

What I think has been their major political miscalculation is precisely their perception of the attitude of Middle England.

When publicity about Mehdi was at it's height you had to search for hardline opinion saying 'throw him out anyway' and even those saying this had a guilty tinge to their tone.

Comments left with the Daily Mail and - yes - even those of The Sun's readers recognised this country's historic attitude to accepting genuinely persecuted people as refugees - it goes back centuries, it's part of who we are.

It was clear from reading those comments, and many of those on the 7,000 strong petition, that ordinary British people well understood this and accepted that this meant accepting persecuted gays and lesbians from countries like Iran.

It was also clear from the horrified overseas media coverage - 'this is Britain!?'

But this political miscalculation only seriously holds true if, now he has 'asylum', Mehdi's case isn't seen as a one-off and, particularly, if gays and lesbians hold Labour to account for their unchanged homophobic policies towards these members of our community. I fear we won't. So prove me wrong.

For us, I think the government's attitude to the pitifully few LGBT asylum seekers we have in Britain shows them up as hypocrites over LGBT rights.

I honestly think that they think these people are so powerless, that their cases so rarely provoke protest and news coverage, they can safely ignore protest; that they will not face any consequences.

They just don't expect a voter backlash.

For us, I think we need to be collectively saying 'enough is enough' to Labour on LGBT asylum seekers and behave as one community.

I, for one, could not be happier for Mehdi but I am not 'grateful' to Jacqui Smith or her boss for this crack in the asylum edifice.

It will take a lot to get me voting Labour again (after a lifetime of support) precisely because of how I have seen how they treat these weakest members of our community.

I hope you feel the same and I hope you tell Labour why you feel it. Until they change their shameful policy on LGBT asylum seekers they don't deserve anyone's vote.

Paul Canning has been an gay activist in two continents for more years than he cares to remember. He is the webmaster for http://madikazemi.blogspot.com.

News reports updates

Links to news items repeating the press statements republished elsewhere on this site will be added here.

• PinkNews, 20 May
  Praise for Home Secretary as Mehdi Kazemi granted asylum in UK
• BBC, 20 May
  Gay Iranian granted asylum in UK
• International Herald Tribune, 20 May
  UK Home Office says gay Iranian teenager will not be deported
  
• Fox, 20 May
  U.K. Will Not Deport Gay Iranian Teen After Lover Was Hanged
• Associated Press Wire, 20 May
  Gay Iranian teen wins right to asylum in Britain
  
• Times, May 21
  News in brief: Gay Iranian wins plea
• Independent, May 21
  Gay student who faced execution in Iran granted asylum in Britain
• Daily Telegraph, May 21
  Gay Iranian teenager wins right to stay in UK
• Agence France Press (AFP), May 21
  Gay Iranian wins deportation battle in Britain
• Sky News, May 21
  Gay Iranian Student Saved

Statement by Dutch MP Boris van der Ham

(Boris led Dutch parliamentary efforts to grant Mehdi asylum in that country)

Homoseksuele Iranese asielzoeker krijgt toch verblijfsvergunning

158033349_4_m0As.jpg De 19-jarige Iranese homoseksuele asielzoeker Mehdi Kazemi krijgt in Groot-Brittannië een verblijfsvergunning. Dit heeft het Britse Home Office vandaag besloten. De jongen vroeg al eerder asiel aan in Groot-Brittannië maar toen uitzetting dreigde naar Iran, kwam hij naar Nederland vanwege de hier geldende bescherming voor homo's uit Iran. D66-Kamerlid Boris van der Ham is erg verheugd over het feit dat Groot-Brittannië nu toch gevolg geeft aan ons pleidooi

Nederland stuurde de asielzoeker terug naar Groot-Britannië onder voorwaarden dat hij niet teruggestuurd zou worden naar Iran. Dat werd besloten tijdens het door D66-Kamerlid Boris van der Ham aangevraagde spoeddebat. In Iran loopt de jongen kans ter dood veroordeeld te worden.

Google translation from the Dutch

Homosexual Iranian asylum seeker will still permit

The 19-year-old gay Iranian asylum seeker Mehdi Kazemi in Britain gets a residence permit. This has the British Home Office decided today. The boy asked earlier sought asylum in Britain but when threatened expulsion to Iran, he came to Canada because the force here for protection from Iran's gay. D66-Boris van der Ham House is very pleased about the fact that Britain now gives effect to our plea

Netherlands sent the applicant back to Great Britain under conditions that he would not be returned to Iran. This was decided during the House by D66-Boris van der Ham requested urgent. In Iran, the boy likely to be sentenced to death.

Simon Hughes statement

'DECISION THAT MEHDI KAREMI CAN STAY - 'GREAT NEWS FOR A VERY DECENT GUY'- SIMON HUGHES

5.17.00pm BST (GMT +0100) Tue 20th May 2008

Responding to this week's decision that the young gay Iranian Mehdi Kazemi has been granted leave to remain in the UK, Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrat MP for North Southwark and Bermondsey who led the argument for Mehdi to be given asylum said today:

"Like Mehdi and his family in Britain, I am delighted by the Home Office decision that my constituent Mehdi Kazemi can now stay in this country and will not be sent back to Iran.

"This is great news for a very decent guy.

"As I have argued over the last eighteen months, the Home Office should not send gay and lesbian people back to countries where they will be at risk of persecution, torture or worse.

" We are already at work planning the next phase of Mehdi's life in the UK. Mehdi now wants to finish his studies and then plans to work. I have no doubt Mehdi will make a very positive contribution to this country and society at large. "

Note for editors: Mehdi has been granted leave to remain for 5 years.

CNN: Britain grants asylum to gay Iranian student

From CNN's Alphonso Van Marsh

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Britain has granted asylum to Mehdi Kazemi, a gay Iranian student who faced deportation from the United Kingdom and feared execution in Iran for being homosexual, officials confirmed Tuesday.

Mehdi Kazemi feared persecution if he had to return to Iran.

"We keep cases under review where circumstances have changed and it has been decided that Mr. Kazemi should be granted leave to remain in the UK based on the particular facts of this case," Britain's Home Office said in a written statement quoting an unnamed UK Border Agency spokesman.

Kazemi's uncle, known as "Saeed," says his teenage nephew received an "unconditional" letter of asylum from the Home Office on Monday.

Kazemi, 19, moved to London to study English in 2004 but later discovered that his boyfriend had been arrested by Iranian police, charged with sodomy and hanged.

Fearing the same fate, he applied for asylum in Britain but was denied in 2007.

The office of Simon Hughes, the member of parliament who took up Kazemi's cause, said the Home Office has granted Kazemi leave for five years.

"Like Mehdi and his family in Britain, I am delighted by the Home Office decision that my constituent, Mehdi Kazemi, can now stay in this country and will not be sent back to Iran," Hughes said in a written statement.

"As I have argued over the last 18 months, the Home Office should not send gay and lesbian people back to countries where they will be at risk of persecution, torture or worse," he said.

Hughes was expected to meet with Kazemi late Tuesday.

Peter Tatchell, of the London-based gay rights activist group OutRage, said the decision "is a victory of sorts in that Mehdi has gotten only a temporary leave to remain. At the end of five years he will have to go through the whole appeal process again."

He added: "Mehdi wouldn't have got leave to remain if there hadn't been massive publicity to his case. There are many other gay and lesbian Iranian asylum seekers that are scheduled for deportation to Iran."

Mehdi granted 'leave to remain'

I am just waiting on confirmation for this but I have just heard second-hand that Mehdi has been granted asylum. More detail when I get it.

2.30pm: It's confirmed, Mehdi told the ukgaynews website that he had received a letter from the Home Office today to say his asylum request had been granted.

“I am so happy,” he said, adding that he was grateful to all the help he had been given, especially by Simon Hughes MP.

A statement will be issued tomorrow.

6.30pm: CNN reporting soon that Mehdi has been granted 'leave to remain' for five years. This is standard Home Office practice and is not the same as 'asylum'.

Further updates will be added as new posts.

Clinton, Obama weigh in on plight of Iranian gays

From Washington Blade

Britain’s deportation of gay Iranians has emerged as a minor presidential campaign issue after a gay rights group asked each candidate to take a stand.

Equality Forum this month called on Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) to encourage British Prime Minister Gordon Brown to halt the deportation of gay Iranian refugees living in Britain.

Malcolm Lazin, the organization’s executive director, said such deportations are tantamount to death sentences for the gay Iranians who fled their homeland.

“We wanted to join the LGBT community in Europe by lending our voice and hopefully the voices of our presidential candidates to what we feel is a significant international human rights concern,” he said.

Obama’s campaign, the first to respond, said in a statement Monday that the senator “believes that the United States and countries around the world have both a legal and a moral obligation to protect victims of persecution based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

“Under an Obama administration, the United States will lead by setting a strong example, which includes making clear that asylum for persecuted people is a bedrock principle of American and international law,” says the statement. “Moreover, Obama will exert diplomatic pressure and employ other foreign policy tools to encourage other nations to address human rights abuses and atrocities committed against LGBT men and women.”

Ben LaBolt, an Obama campaign spokesperson, would not say whether Obama planned to write to Brown on the issue, as Equality Forum requested.

Lee Feinstein, the Clinton campaign’s national security director, said Tuesday that it was tracking the case of Mehdi Kazemi, a 19-year-old gay man living in Britain who faces execution if returned to Iran.

“The campaign has discussed this issue with the U.K. government,” he said. “We were encouraged to learn that the deportation order for Mr. Kazemi has been deferred and is now under review.”

Feinstein said the campaign would “continue to follow this issue closely.”

According to Equality Forum, at least 12 gay Iranians living in Britain risk deportation, including Pegah Emambakhsh, a 40-year-old lesbian whose case last year gained international attention.
Emambakhsh, who fled to Britain from Iran in 2005 after her partner was arrested and tortured, won a delay of her deportation in August after allies circulated her name, case information and photograph online.

Lesley Boulton, an activist leading efforts to secure asylum for Emambakhsh, said the case is still pending and welcomed Equality Forum’s efforts.

“Maybe I’m being pessimistic, but there is a sinister silence in the U.K. from our most senior politicians on LGBT asylum issues,” she said.

Also silent was McCain’s campaign, which did not respond to the Blade’s inquiries.

Lazin said the responsiveness of each campaign to Equality Forum’s request is an indicator of how each candidate will handle gay issues as president.

“Particularly on the Democratic side, most people believe both of the candidates are relatively similar in terms of their stands on our issues,” he said. “I think this is a good way to demonstrate a difference.”

Lazin said each response — or lack thereof — is revealing.

“We feel that if they respond to our request,” he said, “that will indicate how they will handle similar types of human rights concerns in their administration.”

Equality Forum’s request comes as Brown is developing closer ties to all three presidential candidates. The prime minister met with each candidate last week when he was in Washington.

“Clearly, he’s interested in building a relationship with each of them,” Lazin said, “and therefore this would be a great time for them to be making their position clear.”

Lazin said it’s important for the presidential candidates, along with gay activists and voters, to take a stand on the deportations.

“I think what’s important is our civil rights movement is an international civil rights movement,” he said. “And it’s important as an international civil rights movement to proactively take responsibility for our brothers and sisters around the world.”

Support for Mehdi "forwarded to the case file"

Supporters who have contacted the Home Office report that they are receiving the following email in response.

Thank you, for your email. Your support for Mr Mehdi KAZEMI has been noted and your email will be forwarded to the case file for future reference

Public Correspondence Team

This is the email which one supporter sent to Jacqui Smith and to their MP and to the home office.

Dear Ms Smith,

When Mehdi Kazemi is returned to the UK from the Netherlands, please re-evaluate his case. He is a young, gay Iranian. He knows already that his boyfriend has been put to death for the "crime" of being gay. His boyfriend gave his name to the authorities. I am beyond aghast that we might deport this young man to Iran. The magistrate [here, she is referring to Home Office Minister, Lord West] said that gays are not "systematically" persecuted. Well forgive me for being facile but unsystematically executing people strikes me as sufficiently grim.

Yours in hope,

Mehdi back in UK

Mehdi was released today from the Rotterdam detention centre and returned to the UK.

He was interviewed at Heathrow airport by immigration officials and then "released". He is now staying with his uncle.