Dear Friends and Colleagues,

 “We won the Seoul Student Rights Ordinance with all Sexual Orientation Gender Identity (SOGI) related clauses in the original draft included! 

…It happened after the 6 days of protest of LGBT young people and activists, day and night. This is a significant progress in our LGBT history, because we fought face-to-face against the homophobic individuals and groups, including many members of the Council…   The Council had serious debates on sexual orientation/ gender Identity  (SOGI) issues in their plenary session for the first time in our history. One of the Council members read out UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon’s recent speech…  That was the moment that the voices of LGBT people began to be heard, and LGBT people’s human rights recognized…

…We fought, and we won. We debated, and we taught people. And we know that it was all possible because of support from a lot of people—including the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission

(IGLHRC) and so many who participated in and passed along the petition and sent us support statements. Your message was delivered to the members of the Council. Truly, the whole process was more educational than just political, and we know that now we have a better ground to resume our work towards legislation of a broader anti-discrimination law, which previously failed in 2007.

I’d like to share a photo of the historical moment. It was so beautiful see the rainbow in front of the Council building. Now we see the change of tones on LGBT people in the media. History has begun on our side. “

Thank you all for your wonderful support.

Best wishes,

Jihye Kim

LGBT Coalition for the Seoul Student Ordinance

Read the Update: Victory! Seoul Student Rights Ordinance Passed with Sexual Orientation Gender Identity Clauses Included

by Grace Poore

The Education Committee of the Seoul Metropolitan Council in Seoul, Korea has singled out sexual orientation and gender identity for exclusion from the draft bill of Seoul Students Rights Ordinance that can become law on December 19 in Korea’s capital city unless human rights activists manage to delay the bill or change the minds of the Education Committee. If passed, the Students Rights Ordinance will be the first initiative to explicitly protect students’ rights in Korea.

The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission has sent an urgent letter (below) to the Korean Education Committee of the Seoul Metropolitan Council calling for reinstatement of the removed protections for LGBT students.

The letter states:

“By singling out sexual orientation and gender identity for exclusion, the Education Committee of the Seoul Metropolitan Council and the Seoul Metropolitan Council would contravene international human rights standards and state obligations that South Korea has agreed to uphold. These include rights enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The actions of the Seoul Metropolitan Council and its Education Committee contradict the recent vote by the Government of the Republic of Korea in favor of Resolution 17/​19 with regard to “Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity” adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council on June 2011. The resolution, which the government supported, “expressed “grave concerns at acts of violence and discrimination against individuals because of their sexual orientation and gender identity.”

I spoke with Jiyhe Kim, a member of Common Action for Sexual Minority Students in Seoul, and she explained that the initial draft developed by the Resident Initiative Movement (and signed by 97,702 residents of Seoul) contained protections for vulnerable and marginalized students, such as students with disabilities, of lower economic status, who were pregnant, of different racial backgrounds and who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

The initial draft included four clauses which specifically protect LGBT youth:

Article 6 Right to Nondiscrimination states:

“Students have the right not to be discriminated based on sex, religion, age, social status, regional, national, or ethnic origin, language, disability, physical condition including appearance, pregnancy or birth, family type or family status, race, economic status, color, ideological or political opinion, sexual orientation, gender identity, medical history, discipline, grade, and others.”

Article 13 addresses Freedom of Privacy and Right to Privacy Protection and included the right to protection of personal information, including sexual orientation and gender identity. Article 20: Right to School Welfare calls for prioritizing the allocation of budget and other resources for students who have difficulties in realizing their rights due to economic, social, and cultural reasons, including sexual minority students. Article 28 Requires that the Rights of Minority Students be ensured including… sexual minority students.

When the Ordinance draft became public, conservative Christian parents groups attacked the Committee through emails, text messages and telephone calls — particularly opposing the inclusion of LGBT students and pregnant students. Swayed by this reaction, the Education Committee of the Seoul Metropolitan Council deleted Article 6 altogether with the explanation that a general anti-​discrimination clause will be sufficient, and removed sexual minority students from Article 28 as designated minority students.

Jihye Kim explains, “If the Student Rights Ordinance does not include sexual orientation and gender identity as a protected category, mistreatment of LGBT youth in Korea will be justified. And they will be targeted for intensified discrimination and bullying.” She says that data gathered by Common Action for Sexual Minority Students shows that LGBT students in Korea are violently punished and suspended by teachers and school principals; are disparaged by their teachers in classrooms; sent to psychological counseling; forced to transfer to different schools; and more likely to commit suicide.

She adds, “The significance of the Seoul Students Rights Ordinance cannot be overemphasized. Seoul is not just the capital of Korea but also the center of everything in my country. A negative outcome now would send a dangerous message to schools in the rest of the country. And it would further delay the possibility of a national anti-​discrimination law that would protect LGBT people.”

On December 14, Common Action for Sexual Minority Students began a twenty-​four hour sit-​in[i] at the building that houses the Seoul Metropolitan Council — the body that will decide the draft ordinance into law. http://​www​.newscham​.net/​n​e​ws/view.php?board=news&nid=64316

Lawyers, human rights activists and youth have currently joined the protest. They have also circulated a petition internationally, urging the Education Committee of the Seoul Metropolitan Council to restore the initial inclusive draft of the Students Rights Ordinance.

South Korea has ratified numerous human rights treaties at the United Nations and most recently voted in favor of Resolution 17/​19 Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on June 2011.

On December 8, 2011, UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon declared in a message to a panel held at the UN on Ending Bullying on The Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity that he was “dismayed by reports of children all over the world, as young as eleven, suffering “verbal abuse, taunting and serious physical attacks because of their presumed sexual orientation or gender identity… bullying of this kind affects young people all the way through to adulthood, causing enormous and unnecessary suffering… We often think about homophobic bullying as a problem specific to school settings and adolescence. But the roots go deeper; they lie in prevailing harmful attitudes in society at large, sometimes encouraged by divisive public figures and discriminatory laws and practices sanctioned by State authorities.”

Jihye Kim laments that “because of the language barrier, messages from the UN hardly come into the lives of Korean people. That’s why the government of Korea can pretend to be an advocate of human rights for all, including LGBT people. The situation is not promising , but we won’t give up. ” She says, “The mother of an LGBT youth visited the site of our protest and gave a moving supportive speech. And she delivered a statement signed by 896 Christians that says they support our cause.”

For further information and background visit the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) of the United Nations.

Contact Grace Poore via email.

This post originally appeared on The Bilerico Project. Brian Tofte-Schumacher is Communications Associate at the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. He tweets on @IGLHRC and personally as @briantschu.

A year and a half ago, when I said my teary-eyed goodbye to my mom after dropping two suitcases packed with all my essential belongings at the check-in counter for my one-way flight to New York City from Spokane International Airport, I had no idea I would soon be writing about my first experience at the United Nations — especially not this soon.

Nonetheless, here I am, ready for it or not. Saturday, December 10 marked the 63rd anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, following a truly historic week. First came President Obama’s memorandum on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender human rights and US Foreign Policy issued by the White House. Then, we heard an amazingly LGBT-affirming speech from U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to the United Nations in Geneva on Tuesday.

Less astounding, but deeply important to me as well as others present, was the panel discussion about LGBT Bullying and Human Rights, which I attended (and helped to organize) at the New York United Nations headquarters on Thursday. Last week was a hallmark week for LGBT human rights activists and defenders and an awakening for myself.

For me, as a 24-year-old white guy from Spokane, Washington, this week was monumental. I’ve been working at the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) as Communications Associate since July. In that time, I’ve had the opportunity to learn about the work that program staff does in each of their respective regions — Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa, the Middle East and North Africa, and Asia and the Pacific Islands — and I’ve met some international LGBT activists in passing. But this time was different.

On Thursday, December 8th, I sat down in the completely full United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) chamber, shoulder-to-shoulder with representatives from UN member states, grassroots LGBT activists and representatives from LGBT-supportive NGOs from around the world. We had all gathered for the fifth annual LGBT Commemoration of Human Rights Day at the UN. The panel discussion, organized by my colleagues at IGLHRC and our partners at Human Rights Watch along with representatives from a coalition of UN Member States supportive of LGBT rights, opened my eyes to the human side of the work I have mostly understood in a technical sense for the past six months.

Sitting before me was a panel of human rights defenders from Lebanon, Nigeria, Thailand, and the United States, who were joined by representatives from UNESCO and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to address the issue: “Stop Bullying: Ending violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”

It was amazing to hear from high level officials from the United Nations who are doing meaningful work to promote and defend LGBT Human Rights, and to hear the letter of support for LGBT human rights from the Secretary General of the UN himself — words I had never imagined hearing at the United Nations. Yet, it is the connections I made with the human rights defenders themselves that left the biggest impact on me.

Featured left to right: Ifeanyi Orazulike, Carrie Nelson (IGLHRC), Doi Nakpor, Nadine Moawad, and Brian Tofte-Schumacher.

When I met Judy Shepard in the hallway outside the event I found out it wasn’t only my first visit to the UN, but it was hers, too. I thanked her for being present on the panel and for all of the work she has done in the past 13 years since her son Matthew’s brutal murder. I asked her for more information about the Matthew Shepard Foundation and she took the purple “erase hate” bracelet from her wrist and handed it to me so I wouldn’t forget the website. It’s pretty easy to remember, www.MatthewShepard.org, but I’ll cherish this bracelet forever.

I didn’t get to spend much time with our panelist from Lebanon, Nadine Moawad, but she still got me thinking. Nadine is a coordinator with the Coalition for Bodily and Sexual Rights in Muslim Societies. During her presentation on the panel and in subsequent answers to questions from the audience, Nadine stressed the intersectionality of identities which lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Muslims must take in to account. The sexual orientation and gender, gender and religion, religion and nationality, all intersect with each other to make up the fabric of our being. Nadine has left me pondering the way the individual facets of my own identity relate to each other and how these intersections influence the activism I do.

When I met Doi Nakpor, a transgender activist from Thailand, for the first time — the night before the event — she was exhausted from a 20-hour plane ride and nervous about her first presentation in front of the United Nations. But somehow, she was still full of cheer and excitement about her first visit to New York. The next day, in the few hours between the panel event and our evening reception, Doi and I spent time together preparing for a radio interview she was about to have. Sitting on a couch in the lobby of the United Nations Millennium Plaza Hotel, I asked Doi the questions I hoped the host of the show would ask. Together, we took notes on the questions and I tried my best to console her nerves, reassuring her that her English is just fine. To both of our relief, the interview went really well.

Later Thursday evening, we giggled as I mimicked the grimace Doi had on her face while she daringly tried a slice of baguette topped with goat cheese and sundried tomatoes. She taught me the English translation for “khatoey,” the word used to describe transgender people in Thai, is “ladyboy.” Khatoey is used for both trans women and gay men. We spent the rest of the evening practicing my pronunciation of khatoey. The next day on Facebook Doi declared our friendship as the Kathoey Thai-New York Alliance Network. In those two short days, I became friends with an activist who shared a part of her work with me in a way I could only understand by being in her presence.

I first met Ifeanyi Orazulike, a Nigerian LGBT activist, in September and got to know him over the past four months through his work with IGLHRC while he completed the Human Rights Advocates Program at Columbia University. Having the opportunity to get to know Ifeanyi has given me a concrete perspective of the impact the proposed anti-gay legislation is having in Nigeria. In our discussions prior to his panel presentation, which he then shared with the audience, Ifeanyi told me he has received death threats to himself and his son.

Before I met Ifeanyi, I would have been saddened and disturbed to hear that one person would threaten to take another’s life for defending their right to simply be themselves. I didn’t have any real connection or gateway to truly understand the realities of life in Nigeria. Now that I have a personal connection with Ifeanyi, someone who has received these death threats directly, I’m downright angry. I would be absolutely devastated if anything were to happen to him.

Personally feeling the impact of the anti-gay legislation being passed around in Nigeria through my friendship with Ifeanyi makes this work so much more real for me. As a white guy who has lived in gay-affirming places like Bellingham and New York City, I have never had to (and might not ever have to) balance my personal safety with the expression of my sexual orientation. It’s important for us all to have an occasional reality check on our privileges as a true reminder of what’s at stake in the activist work we are doing.

My experiences last week changed the way I understand the International Human Rights framework and have caused me to reflect on my own activism at home. For a period of time, I was feeling unsure of the impact I am able to have as a New York-based member of a network of international human rights defenders. The real conversations I had with Doi, Ifeanyi, and others on Thursday; being in the ECOSOC Chamber, a room where many important human rights discussions occur; and getting a hug, a handshake, or a smile from someone who is risking it all to improve the situation for LGBT people in their community, has fundamentally changed the way I understand IGLHRC’s work, our partners’ work, and the important work of the United Nations.

We are all a part of a diverse family. Each of us makes a contribution that keeps our family alive. Thursday’s panel discussion and the people I met renewed my commitment to continue living, learning, and growing in this diverse family filled with love, fierceness and the strength to make positive change. This week confirmed for me that the field of International Human Rights, while sometimes hard to understand, is the right place for me, right now.

A video archive of the panel discussion is available on the UN’s website, by visiting: http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/2011/12/stop-bullying-ending-violence-and-discrimination-based-on-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity.html.

For a tweet-by-tweet replay of some notable quotes I took down during the event, visit @IGLHRC on Twitter. Continue the discussion about this event and bullying in general by using hashtag #StopBullying

“The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) today honors the memory of the many trans men and women whom we have lost across the globe. From Latin America, to the Middle East, from Africa to Asia discrimination, ignorance, transphobia and violence have unduly taken the lives of innocent trans men and women who sought to live with dignity and respect. In remembering their lives and their sacrifice, we also honor the courageous work activists and allies around the world do each day to advance the human rights of all trans people.”

Cary Alan Johnson, Executive Director, IGLHRC

Trans Day of Remembrance: Africa · Indonesia · Latin America · Turkey

Africa Regional Trans Health and Advocacy Conference November 26th to 28th, Capetown, South Africa

In South Africa, IGLHRC has partnered with Gender DynamiX, the first African organization solely for the transgender community. In 2008, IGLHRC and Gender DynamiX together held a Strategy Workshop for transgender activists, the first of its kind on the continent. Held in Cape Town, South Africa, the historic workshop brought together 15 activists from 9 East and Southern African countries—Burundi, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia, and Zimbabwe—to address the very specific needs of transgender people on the African continent. It marked a key step in the process of defining and building the African transgender movement by African transgender people.

This month Gender DynamiX and IGLHRC are again partnering for another historic event, the first African Regional Trans Health and Advocacy Conference to be held November 26th to 28th in Capetown. The conference will feature qualitative and quantitative research within an African context. The conference has identified two clear focus areas: to educate Health Care Professionals on service provision to Transgender, Transsexual and Gender Nonconforming people; and to explore Indigenous Knowledge and communication in relation to Transgender, Transsexual and Gender Nonconforming persons. Sel Hwang, a transgender health expert and member of IGLHRC’s Board of Directors, will join local activists in this transnational dialogue.

For more information about the conference and the topics that will be covered, see the conference’s website: http://transhealth.genderdynamix.org.za

Trans Day of Remembrance: Africa · Indonesia · Latin America · Turkey

“While we remember and mourn the loss of Turkish trans women whose lives were brutally taken from us this year, we must recognize too, the courage of the activists who tirelessly work to advance the human rights of trans people in the Middle East.”

Hossein Alizdeh, IGLHRC Coordinator Middle East and North Africa Program

During the past twelve months, the Turkish trans community has continued to be the target of fatal hate crimes. On April 19, a 36-year-old trans woman identified as R.B. was shot in Izmir, Turkey. She was rushed to the hospital, but she passed away before reaching the hospital. Two other trans women were injured during the shootout. On July 31, Didem, a trans woman, was brutally murdered in Istanbul, Turkey’s most populated city. The assailants cut the throat of this 21-year-old trans woman. On October 6, a woman was shot to death in Gaziantep, one of the southern cities of Turkey.

The Turkish trans community is also subject to transphobia perpetuated by officials, including the police. On June 19, 2010 the Turkish police stopped three transgender human rights defenders who were driving their cars, asking them to be taken to the police station. The activists requested a reason for their detention and insisted that without a reason they will not go to the police station. The police used violence to detain the trans women and later charged them with “resisting the police” and “insulting the police.” On October 26, 2011, Ankara’s Criminal Court found the activists guilty and sentenced the three-transgender human rights defenders to jail terms ranging from five to eighteen months.

On November 2, 2011 IGLHRC partnered with Pembe Hayat (Pink Life), the leading national trans group in Turkey, and several other human rights organizations to co-author a letter to the Turkish Ministry of Justice urging the government to drop charges against the three trans human rights defenders arrested on June 19.

Despite all restrictions and violence against the Turkish trans community, the trans organizations in Turkey continue their admirable work to promote and defend the rights of their community. To that end, Pink Life is organizing a Conference on Combating Transphobic Hatred on November 18 to 19 2011, in Ankara, Turkey.

Trans Day of Remembrance: Africa · Indonesia · Latin America · Turkey

“The killings of transgender people, involving Indonesian law enforcement are poorly or never investigated. More often they are put into the freezer by the state, and left unresolved.”

Grace Poore, IGLHRC, Regional Coordinator, Asia and Pacific Islands

Indonesian waria (transgender) activist Elly Susana was killed in 2007. To date, there has been no justice for her. Elly Susana’s story is told in Courage Unfolds, a video produced by the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission to reveal the violence and discrimination experienced by LGBT people in Asia and their efforts to fight for equality, safety and decriminalization. Elly Susana’s death, which occurred during an alleged raid by public order officers (Saptol PP), was widely covered by media.

In January 2010, Arus Pelangi, a national advocacy organization for LGBT human rights, attempted yet again to revive the investigation into Elly’s death. They asked the Indonesia National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) to convene all parties involved in the case, including Satpol PP. Although Satpol PP is implicated in Elly’s death, they chose not to come to the Komnas HAM meeting. According to King Oey of Arus Pelangi, “Their official position has always been that they did not raid any place on that particular date.”

Central Jakarta police in whose jurisdiction the case falls have also failed in their duty to investigate Elly’s death with any seriousness.

King Oey says, “They sent a low ranking officer to the meeting convened by Komnas HAM. And he said that the police cannot proceed if witnesses don’t come forward although Arus Pelangi already brought forward three witnesses who provided testimonies about the raid by the public order officers that led to Elly’s death.”

Despite significant obstacles, Indonesian LGBT activists persist in their concern for the human rights of Trans people. In 2011, Komnas Perempuan (Indonesian National Commission of Women) finally recognized waria as female. In observance of Transgender Day of Remembrance, LGBT activists in Indonesia will hold a photo exhibit on violence against trans people.

Trans Day of Remembrance: Africa · Indonesia · Latin America · Turkey

The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) together with REDLACTRANS and Heartland Alliance was able to support all these regional advocacy initiatives at the Organization of the American States (OAS). Last June these organizations held a meeting in San Salvador with trans representatives from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama with the purpose of evaluating advocacy for the legal recognition of gender identity in the region.

Learn more about our advocacy at the Organization of American States and for an update about or work on trans issues in Africa, Indonesia and Turkey.

Increasing Awareness of Trans People’s Issues at the Organization of American States

The OAS has an exemplary history in the recognition of gender identity of transgender people. Since the first participation of trans people in the OAS General Assembly in 2007 the agency has recognized gender identity of transgender people in credentialing and all its procedures, becoming the first organization in the world to do so. In 2008 an OAS resolution, condemned human rights violations based on sexual orientation or gender identity “wherever they occur, in particular the use of the death penalty on this ground, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the practice of torture and other cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment, arbitrary arrest or detention and deprivation of economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to health.

As a result of the meeting in San Salvador, we decided to advocate the Organization of American States to include gender identity in its work to achieve its human rights goal of Right to Identity. Since then, we have undertaken several initiatives to increase awareness in the system, including participating in thematic hearings at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

There are several trans people’s organizations and human rights activists at the national and regional level leading these initiatives: Marcela Romero, the regional coordinator for REDLACTRANS, and IGLHRC regional coordinator, Marcelo Ferreyra, work side by side with representatives from countries including Gloria Mariño of Uruguay; Monica Hernandez of El Salvador; Nairobi Catillo of Dominican Republic; Venus Tejada of Panama; Belissa Andia of Peru; Marie Betancourt of Paraguay; Silvia Martines of Nicaragua; Paty Betancourt of Mexico; Claudia Spellmant of Honduras; Johana Ramirez of Guatemala; Rashell Erazo of Ecuador; Valentina Fiasco of Colombia; Bianca Vidal of Chile; Raiza Torriani of Bolivia; Liza Minnelli of Brazil and Claudia Pia Baudracco of Argentina. Each of these activists are leading the way to advancing human rights for trans people in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Many others who from their grassroots efforts are very important also collaborate with IGLHRC in this work within the region: Marlene Wayar; Johana Berkins; Diana Sacayan and Mauro Cabral in Argentina; Andres Ignacio Rivera; Michell Riquelme and Franco Fuica in Chile; Mia Quetzal in Belize; Natasha Jimenez in Costa Rica; Silueta X network in Equador; Marlenne Bennedeck Dumont in Dominican Republic. There are many more who join with IGLRHC in remembrance of trans people lost to us and with respect for those who deserve and must come to share in the dignity of human rights for every one, every where.

Trans Day of Remembrance: Africa · Indonesia · Latin America · Turkey

Bay Area Reporter

Kenyan ex-pat aims to help gay countrymen

KALW-FM, San Francisco

Out in the Bay – Africa LGBT Rights

Salon.com

Gay Africans flee persecution

Photos from the event are also available in our Picasa Web Album

Larry’s Story

Larry Misedah is a Kenyan gay rights activist who began his work as a human rights defender in 2004 when he joined Ishtar MSM, one of the Kenya’s first organizations to provide health services to men who have sex with men (MSM).

In 2007, Larry came out publicly at the World Social Forum in Nairobi and became the spokesperson for Sexual Minorities Uganda’s (SMUG) first media campaign. After becoming a visible leader in the East African gay community, Larry was banished from his family. Then a student at Kenyatta University, his academic future was threatened when his family refused to continue paying his tuition. Threats of violence on the campus became unbearable. Larry was forced to flee Kenya for eight months.

Homosexuality remains criminalized in Kenya and is punishable by up to 14 years of imprisonment.

Upon his return, Larry continued to struggle within Kenya’s hostile legal and political environment. Homophobic stigma, which remains high, caused Larry to be a subject of continued discrimination and violence. Nonetheless he persisted in LGBT human rights advocacy:

• In September 2007, Larry collaborated with International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) staff to draft East and Central Africa’s first-ever Declaration on Transgender Rights.
• In 2009, Larry represented Kenya at a convening of LGBT activists engaged in HIV prevention work for MSM at the African AIDS conference in Dakar, Senegal.
• Subsequently Larry worked with IGLHRC on a capacity building and exchange program that brought LGBT activists from Tanzania to his organization, SMUG, in Kenya to learn, exchange ideas and plan strategy for effective HIV programming and LGBT liberation.

Larry was granted asylum by the U.S. government in December 2010 with assistance from IGLHRC and other international organizations. Larry Misedah currently resides in Houston, Texas.

The Asia Pacific Forum (APF) is the first regional body in the world to lobby National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) to integrate the Yogyakarta Principles into their human rights work. It currently has 18 full member institutions from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Australia, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mongolia, Nepal, New Zealand, Palestine, Philippines, Qatar, South Korea, Thailand and Timor Leste. Maldives and Sri Lanka currently have associate member status for failing to comply with the Paris Principles.¹

Yogyakarta 2009

In May 5-7 2009, the APF invited IGLHRC and several other international human rights experts² to Yogyakarta, Indonesia for a historic workshop to consider what actions might be taken by NHRIs in Asia to prevent violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI). My presentation provided an overview on the impact of criminalization and discrimination on LGBT people’s lives in the API region. As part of this presentation, I offered the following recommendations from IGLRHC to the APF:³

• Members of the APF must recognize that sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression (SOGIE) are integral to every person’s dignity and humanity. The freedom to claim these aspects of selfhood without fear of violence and/or discrimination enables a climate of respect and equality for all people.
• NHRIS of the APF should get and promote training on these issues, debunk myths about LGBT people, and confront homophobia wherever it occurs.
• NHRIS in the APF must recommend and advocate for the appointment of LGBT people as Commissioners of NHRIs to fulfill the plurality requirement of the Paris Principles.⁴
• The APF must find a way to navigate cultural relativist arguments that deny the presence of homosexuality or alternative transgender expressions—these arguments in fact neglect and erase histories of homoeroticism and third gender presence in many Asian cultures.
• All NHRIs in Asia and elsewhere must recognize the legitimacy of claims made by people who suffer violence and discrimination on the basis of their SOGIE.
• NHRIs should repeatedly, consistently and consciously raise the awareness of governments and citizens about the negative impact of state-sponsored homophobia and media stigmatization by encouraging research and awareness-raising campaigns.
• NHRIs are expected to be independent, autonomous and vigilant in their investigation of human rights abuses. Partnering or networking with LGBT and other civil society groups will improve NHRIs’ documentation of the ways in which LGBT people’s rights are violated.
• NHRIs that co-sponsor and participate in national LGBT events can help build bridges with civil society groups and increase the credibility of NHRIs as national human rights defenders.
• Many entities in the UN system have recognized and addressed the need for protections against violence and discrimination on the basis of SOGI. NHRIs must acquaint national governments and citizens with the international standards regarding SOGI, and help promote these standards at national levels.
• Violence against LGBT people takes place in both public and private spheres. It is said that in Asia, family and religion regulate sexuality, often resulting in human rights violations, with the tacit endorsement of the state. The APF and member NHRIs are uniquely positioned to expose these violations.

Left: Paisarn Likhitpreechakul and colleagues from For-SOGI mapping the Thailand National Human Rights Commission’s implementation of SOGI recommendations. Right: Julian Lee from Malaysia mapping Suhakam’s work on LGBT rights.

Bali 2010

As a followup to the 2009 Yogyakarta workshop, the APF commissioned a body of renowned jurists in the Asia Pacific region (known as the Advisory Council of Jurists – ACJ) to undertake a study and make recommendations to the APF on how its member NHRIs could address violations on the basis of SOGI.

In April 2010, the ACJ invited the Alternative Law Forum in Bangalore, IGLHRC, ARC International and UNAIDS to help with its deliberations on SOGI before formulating guidelines for NHRIs. In December 2010, the ACJ released its report, revealing that 15 of the APF member countries had no laws explicitly prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people, seven of the countries had laws specifically criminalizing same sex, eleven of the countries did not recognize changed gender status—meaning that nearly all of the 17 countries whose NHRIs belong to the APF have national laws and practices that fail to comply with international human rights laws regarding LGBT rights. To rectify these lapses, the ACJ issued 60 recommendations, ranging from building the internal capacity and awareness of NHRIS about LGBT rights, to advocating for anti-discrimination and anti-violence measures, and advocating for decriminalization of sexual and gender variance. For all these activities, NHRIs had to consult with LGBT civil society groups—a key element for ensuring that the work was not being undertaken in a vacuum, disconnected from the realities of LGBT people’s lives, and discounting the LGBT activists in their own countries. NHRIs were given eight months to digest the report and begin a staged implementation. Written and verbal reports were expected by the 2011 APF meeting in Bangkok to indicate what actions were already being taken to further the ACJ’s recommendations.

There is a commonality between the APF and other regional human rights monitoring organizations like the Inter American Commission for Human Rights, African Commission of Peoples and Human Rights, European Union, and the Council of Europe in that members of the APF have expressed a shared political will regarding human rights, which has tremendous positive implications – NHRIs of the APF can be important partners with civil society groups that are working to change how LGBT people are treated in Asia, the APF can proactively advocate that SOGI are human rights, the APF can ensure that its member governments meet the accountability benchmark, thus leading by example to facilitate the progress of human rights for all in the region.

However, the challenge for NHRIs of the APF is advocating for LGBT human rights in the face of opposition—where national laws, cultural values and religious beliefs are in conflict with sexual rights and gender rights. Conservatism in Asia has usually been formulated in terms of cultural and religious relativism. IGLHRC felt that these trends would slow or stall the promotion and implementation of the ACJ recommendations. In addition, the APF is not an inter-governmental body and does not function like other regional human rights organizations—it has no mechanism for enforcement.

To ensure that the NHRIs did take the ACJ recommendations on SOGI seriously and did not deem LGBT rights less important than other issues, IGLHRC initiated some steps. We wanted LGBT rights to be integrated into other human rights issues and to be relevant to other aspects of NHRI work—not siloed and compartmentalized, not treated as special rights, and not disappear once the APF moves on to other issues. IGLHRC

• Publicized the ACJ report and recommendations widely to LGBT groups and activists in Asia.
• Convened regular Skype meetings with a coalition of LGBT rights activists in Asia to create a network of support and ideas exchange that would facilitate using the ACJ report as an opportunity to engage with their NHRIs on LGBT rights.
• Negotiated with the APF to provide LGBT activists access to the Bangkok meeting and space on the program so that we could engage with the NHRIs.
• Funded the travel of LGBT rights activists who are working with their NHRIs so they could be in Bangkok for the APF Meeting.
• Held an Asian LGBT Strategy Session in Bangkok prior to the APF meeting.

Bangkok 2011

King Oey and Rafael da Costa from Indonesia at the LGBT Strategy session convened by IGLHRC, September 6 in Bangkok.

The series of Skype meetings convened by IGLHRC from January to July 2011 enabled participating activists to give one another moral support and practical suggestions on how to deal with slow or poorly performing NHRIs. It also helped IGLHRC plan our work for the APF meeting in Bangkok. The LGBT Strategy Session gave us the opportunity for more focused work, which brought a sense of urgency, solidarity, cohesion and regional context to the country level advocacy. During the half day session, activists from Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Philippines and Thailand assessed what their NHRIs had done and how much further they needed to go to lend credibility to the ACJ recommendations on SOGI.

In response to IGLHRC’s negotiations for LGBT access to the APF proceedings, the Secretariat set aside 20 spots for LGBT activists to attend the biennial conference, which enabled activists from the region to formally and informally share our concerns with the APF and NHRI delegates. The presence of 12 LGBT rights activists from within Asia did make an impression—particularly as they took turns at the microphone and voiced concerns. In addition, the program allocated space for NGO statements—which provided an opportunity for IGLHRC, the International Service on Human Rights and the ANNI Network to comment on LGBT rights.

IGLHRC’s Asia Program Coordinator delivering statement to NHRIs at the APF biennial conference, September 7.

IGLHRC’s recommendations included the following:

• The APF should develop concrete toolkits to aid NHRIs in their efforts to operationalize the ACJ recommendations on the basis of SOGI in a timely manner. The toolkits should be developed in consultation with LGBT organizations.
• The APF should conduct annual reviews of the progress of NHRI implementation of the ACJ recommendations on SOGI.
• The APF should facilitate the participation of LGBT organizations in the review of NHRIs by the International Coordinating Committee (ICC).
• The APF should facilitate the inclusion of references to human rights violations on the basis of SOGI by NHRIs in United Nations fora.
• NHRIs should develop accessible and expedient complaint reception mechanisms for all survivors of human rights violations, regardless of SOGI or other status such as race, gender, ethnicity, health, religion, social origin, or economic or education status.
• NHRIs should under no circumstances mandate a police report of alleged abuse as a pre-requisite for opening an investigation into a specific complaint.
• In addition to integrating LGBT rights into the work of all NHRI commissioners and staff, NHRIs should designate a specific LGBT rights liaison.
• NHRIs should recognize that the principles of universality and intersectionality mean that they should both integrate LGBT rights into their work generally and allocate resources, including time, for LGBT human rights violations specifically. NHRIs should not make the mistake of perceiving LGBT human rights violations as secondary to other human rights concerns.
• NHRIs should immediately document and research human rights, including, inter alia: the criminalization of consensual homosexual acts and its impact; the possibility of official recognition of changes to a person’s gender identity; and the lack of explicit prohibition of discrimination on the basis of SOGI.
• When NHRIs receive complaints from individuals whose rights have been violated on the basis of their SOGI, they should seek to understand how individual violations fall into larger patterns of abuse and work to prevent the repeat of similar human rights violations.
• When engaging with vulnerable groups such as LGBT individuals, NHRIs should take every precaution to ensure that interlocutors are not put at risk; they should exercise the highest standards for maintaining privacy and confidentiality.

Read the full Outcome Statement of IGLHRC delivered at the APF Biennial Conference on September 7, 2011.

You can also see it on the APF website at: http://www.asiapacificforum.net/carousel/about/annual-meetings/16th-thailand-2011

Thailand’s NHRI, as host of the APF Meeting and biennial conference also responded positively to IGLHRC’s negotiations for LGBT space on the program. They scheduled a lunchtime discussion about the regional situation and roles of governments, NHRIs and civil society groups on the rights of LGBT people. Malaysia’s Julian Lee, representing Seksualiti Merdeka and I co-facilitated the discussion, which focused on regionalizing the Yogyakarta Principles. Three key recommendations emerged from this lunchtime discussion, which Philippines activist, Jonas Bagas, read out to the APF delegates: NHRIs should popularize the Yogyakarta Principles, the APF should remind NHRIs about their role at the United Nations which includes presenting data on cases of human rights violations because of SOGI, the APF should set up a subcommittee on SOGI for NHRIs.

Front to Back: Rob Garner (Mongolia), Angie Umbac (Philippines), Jessica Stern (IGLHRC), Julian Lee (Malaysia), King Oey (Indonesia), Rafael da Costa (Indonesia), Jonas Bagas (Philippines).

Why Bangkok APF Convening Was Important

On the afternoon of September 7, Vitit Muntabhorn, who co-chaired the ACJ’s work on the SOGI recommendations, kicked off the APF’s session on SOGI. He emphasized, “We are not asking people to like or dislike anyone. We’re asking people to be humane and kind. Human rights is about respect, protect, reflect. Not about likes.” Professor Muntabhorn reminded NHRIs that despite the existence of laws criminalizing homosexuality in the APF region, there were also governments that had changed their laws or reformed anti-sodomy laws. “For instance, the Fiji Constitution recognizes the rights of LGBT people. In Indonesia, Singapore, New Zealand and Australia transgender people can change their identity cards to reflect their changed gender. In Pakistan, the Supreme Court has legalized hijras and ruled that they should receive welfare benefits. In Nepal, the Supreme Court has asked the legislature to develop legal protections and remedies for LGBT people,” he said and added, “The ACJ approach was to recognize that SOGI is a difficult issue in many countries. So our recommendations took a soft entry point—start with dialogue and education then the harder step—reform laws and practices, remove laws.”

Professor Muntabhorn’s speech was meant as a lead in to APF members discussing the outcomes of implementing the recommendations of the ACJ reference on SOGI. This was to be the highlight of the conference for many of us. It was the reason IGLHRC had invested so much in getting our Asia staff and activist colleagues to Bangkok. We all wanted to hear what NHRIs had to say—their success stories, barriers, who needed help, why there were delays, and who had done nothing. We wanted a chance to engage with the NHRIs about their reports, offer support, challenge, communicate. But when the time came for the NHRIs to report, there was confusion. Three NHRI representatives made statements but the rest stayed silent.

The Thai representative said, “We have had a dialogue with LGBT groups for some time. We have begun a study on partnership laws and the law on gender change.”

The Indonesian representative simply got up and stated, “We will focus on two issues and we agree with all the recommendations of IGLHRC and we will implement them.” The Qatar representative, speaking from a personal point of view, remarked, “It’s a sensitive issue and we can’t bring this up… Maybe APF and ACJ can meet with religious leaders.”⁵

Later, I found out that other NHRIs who had wanted to report on their implementation, were waiting for the chair of the session, Etta Rosales to invite them to speak, which she did not do. When asked later why she did not call on the NHRIs to deliver their reports, Ms. Rosales who is the current chair of the Philippines NHRI, admitted that she had no idea the APF was expecting her to call on individual NHRIs to deliver their reports. Kieren Fitzpatrick, executive director of the APF Secretariat was surprised by this and attributed it to lack of communication by APF staff. He was also surprised that NHRIs felt they had to be called on to speak when they could have simply raised their hand and spoken in turn.

In addition to the silent NHRIs, I also noticed the glaring absence of NHRI representatives from several countries. I even heard one representative from the Qatar express surprise that NHRIs were “expected to talk about SOGI when the conference was supposed to focus on development as a human right.” The absence of the NHRIs was all the more noticeable when the next day, the room was packed with delegates for the APF’s new thematic focus, development as a human right—which reinforced what the LGBT activists from Asia and I suspected might happen—SOGI would be shafted.

In response to the shocking lack of transparency and mis-handling of the reporting session on the ACJ-SOGI recommendations, IGLHRC and our local activist partners delivered a second statement to the delegates—this time, expressing our disappointment at the lack of accountability to the APF’s own process.

“The absence of any references to the ACJ recommendations in the written or verbal reports of some of NHRIs is frustrating. Some NHRIs were even absent during the SOGI session. A recognition of barriers to the enforcement of the recommendations would have been preferred since such acknowledgement would have at least informed the next steps that should be taken at the country level or in regional platforms. It would have been an opportunity for NHRIs who started to work on the recommendations to support others who encounter difficulties, and it would have given the civil society a chance to engage their NHRIs… It is unclear if the current silence indicates a disregard for the ACJ recommendations on sexual orientation and gender identity or if it reflects the absence of a clearer or a more concrete process to push NHRIs to act on ACJ references generally. Either way, we urge the APF to require specific annual reports on NHRIs work related to sexual orientation and gender identity. It is likewise urgent for the APF to identify and implement its own review mechanism to the ACJ recommendations. One recommendation we offer is that NHRIs submit detailed reports on steps taken to implement the ACJ recommendation on sexual orientation and gender identity by November 2011 so they can be disseminated on the APF website. We stand ready to provide technical assistance to the APF and to NHRIs to so that by the 2013 APF meeting, there can be signifiant and concrete progress on LGBT human rights.”

Read the full SOGI statement from Asian LGBT activists and IGLHRC protesting the poor reporting by NHRIs on the ACJ-SOGI recommendations.

Our statement evoked several reactions:

The New Zealand NHRI asked the chair of the session to extend the time allocated for the agenda so that they could give their report. Australia and Mongolia NHRIs also delivered their reports. All three reports are on the APF website at: http://www.asiapacificforum.net/carousel/about/annual-meetings/16th-thailand-2011⁶

The representative of the Afghanistan NHRI said, “If some NHRIs are keeping quiet, then they have a lot of battles ahead of them. More than 80 percent of people in Afghanistan are uneducated. It does not mean we’re not working on SOGI. We live in a very difficult environment and we are trying to use religion to explore this issue. We want to see how other Muslim countries are doing it.”

The representative from the Palestine NHRI threw out a challenge. “We should not appear as hypocrites when it comes to LGBT issues. What we need is information on how to go about it. In principle, we support the rights of LGBTs especially non-discrimination on the basis of SOGI. But it’s extremely difficult. In our region, we need to break the silence. Our words are contradicting our actions on the ground.”

The NHRI from Thailand remarked, “It seems like we have prejudices against LGBT everywhere. If we are to eradicate prejudices, then we should do education at an early age with children about the rights of LGBTs. If we wait till they are grown up, it’s difficult.”

I appreciated hearing from the NHRIs that reported on actions taken, and also from those that were candid about the obstacles they faced. It surprised me that the NHRI from India was silent given the High Court’s ruling on Section 377. Indian activists I contacted said that their NHRI had not even called a meeting with LGBT civil society groups to discuss the ACJ recommendations on SOGI. I also recall a representative of the Malaysia NHRI saying that they had many other issues to contend with. No one doubts this to be the case. But to offer this as an explanation at a session reserved for a discussion on the ACJ recommendation on SOGI comes across as an excuse for ongoing neglect of LGBT people’s concerns. It is the obligation of all NHRIs to defend all human rights not some human rights.

Moving Forward

NHRIs may not understand that LGBT people face multiple discrimination, not only because of our sexual orientation and gender identity but also because of other aspects of our identities such as ethnicity, age, religion nationality, disability, social origin. They may not be seeing the intersectional and cross-cutting aspects of violence and discrimination that LGBT people face. Not looking at the full spectrum of human rights means not thinking about LGBT people when NHRIs are working on other human rights issues – such as torture, the death penalty, disability.

Some of the NHRIs at the APF Meeting in Bangkok expressed genuine willingness to learn and increase their capacity for addressing LGBT concerns. Others made weak gestures or gave lip service to opposing discrimination against LGBT people. I strongly believe that in the absence of strong, sustained, and respectful partnerships with LGBT activists and groups, the recommendations of the ACJ may fall between the cracks of NHRI priorities, which raises the question—if hostile, reluctant or nervous NHRI Commissioners are giving LGBT issues a low priority even at the APF level wouldn’t they give even less attention to these issues at the domestic level?

IGLHRC’s Asia Program will continue to work closely with activists on the ground while liaising with the APF Secretariat on its commitments to improving conditions for LGBT people in the region. At least until the next APF meeting that is slated for 2013, we commit to

1. Continue facilitating support and technical assistance for local activists, and through them monitor which NHRIs have advocated for changes to laws and practices to promote and protect the human rights of LGBT people, and what NHRIs are doing to address community attitudes that fuel discrimination and hate crimes.
2. Lobby the APF to ensure that NHRIs of the APF submit substantive reports on actions they are taking to fulfill the ACJ recommendations on SOGI, and to make these reports public.
3. Reach out to the APF and its NHRI members and offer training to help them understand the intersectionality of rights and the impact of multiple discrimination on LGBT people, as well as the relevance of the Yogyakarta Principles to the work of NHRIs.

Parallel Civil Society Event

Grace Poore speaking at ANNI Conference. Also on panel, Eleanor Openshaw from ISHR and Vitit Muntabhorn from ACJ. Angie Umbac moderated the panel.

In conjunction with the APF meeting and biennial conference, the ANNI network of Asian human rights defenders that monitors the performance of NHRIs in the region held a two-day civil sociey conference on September 5 and 6, focusing on the two human rights issues that the APF was covering in Bangkok—SOGI and development. ANNI allocated 90 minutes for a panel and discussion. Eleanor Openshaw from the International Service on Human Rights spoke about recent developments on LGBT rights in the United Nations , Professor Muntabhorn spoke about the ACJ reference on SOGI, and I spoke about the implementation status of the ACJ recommendations.

IGLHRC-sponsored activists were able to attend this conference, dramatically increasing the visibility of LGBT activists from the region. I used my panel presentation to lobby members of ANNI for their support in ensuring that NHRIs were incorporating LGBT rights in their work and to recognize the interconnected aspects of discrimination faced by LGBT people.

Read Grace Poore’s speech at ANNI Conference about NHRI performance on LGBT rights.

NOTES

1. Previous APF thematic focal points include child pornography, death penalty, disability, human rights defenders, internally displaced persons, terrorism and rule of law, torture, trafficking, and women’s rights.
2. John Fisher, Michael O’ Flaherty, Vitit Muntabhorn and Sonia Corrrea were the other experts who presented at the 2009 APF workshop.
3. G. Poore, Briefing paper, “Human Rights Abuses in Asia On The Basis of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Gender Expression 2000 – 2009.”
4. The APF’s member institutions are expected to comply with the Paris Principles, which are guidelines that set minimum standards for NHRIs to carry out their roles, including: independence guaranteed by the legislature or constitution, autonomy from government, power and resources to investigate, and pluralistic membership. Consistent non-compliance results in accreditation being suspended and membership in the APF downgraded from full member to associate member, which incurs loss of voting privileges in the APF.
5. The speaker referred to Quranic text and highlighted the concept of “hanta.” However later that day, she acknowledged that she was wrong about this text.
6. National Human Rights Institutions of Australia, New Zealand, Mongolia, Indonesia and the Philippines received grants from the APF to carry out the ACJ recommendations on SOGI.