A survey of LGBTI organisations across Europe and Central Asia finds they face significant challenges in the face of growing anti-LGBTI forces, and the ongoing COVID-19 crisis.

A report launched today by Europe’s leading LGBTI organisation, ILGA-Europe indicates that LGBTI activists are struggling to resource their work amid a number of challenging factors.

The report, entitled, “Funding To Meet Changing Realities – LGBTI Organisations on the State of Funding in Europe and Central Asia, Survey 2021”, based on survey responses from 300 LGBTI organisations across Europe and Central Asia finds that:

• About one third of LGBTI organisations operate on yearly budgets under 20,000 Euro, whilst engaging in a wide variety of activities to simultaneously serve their communities and advance laws and policies to protect LGBTI people’s human rights
• Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, organisations across the region stepped up to fill the gaps by providing services to LGBTI people that should have been provided by public authorities
• Every second LGBTI organisation in the region experiences stress and burnout due to not being able to meet the needs of LGBTI people coming in for help

Overall, 84.9% of organisations say that they have been faced with burnout issues. The most common cause of stress and burnout across was not being able to meet the needs of LGBTI people coming in for help (49.7%), responding to COVID-19 (46.1%) and having to respond to external threats from right wing, anti-LGBTI or “anti-gender” groups or individuals (43.6%).

The report further assesses challenges that LGBTI organisations face and maps the diversity of work done and communities served by organisations. About three-quarters of LGBTI organisations identified a lack of funding for the activities that are most important to their organisation as a barrier to implementing projects. They often do the most important work for them without funding, or without dedicated funding.

The report also indicates that the despite mounting workloads, burnout and growing threats and attacks, LGBTI organisations continue to widen their work, focusing on a variety of highly vulnerable groups within the LGBTI community, such as migrants, young people, and trans and gender and non-conforming people, and are in dire need of additional resources to ensure that they can strengthen these efforts.

Amongst the good news is that LGBTI organisations across the regions have grown the proportion of their own resources to support their work, for instance by getting more donations from companies and private donors.

Launching the report, ILGA-Europe Programmes, Director Björn van Roozendaal said: “Behind the rich data contained in this report there is a powerful story of LGBTI activists who amidst growing opposition, rising oppression and an unfolding pandemic have continued to stand up for their communities, reached out to those who are most affected and continued to undertake new work and build partnerships to meet today’s challenges. But resources continue to be scarce. The stark findings of this report should be a call to action to anyone who can and wants to support or step-up their commitment to support LGBTI organisations.”

---

Further information:

The report Funding To Meet Changing Realities – LGBTI Organisations on the State of Funding in Europe and Central Asia, Survey 2021 is written by Erin Howe and Somjen Frazer from Strength in Numbers Consulting Group for ILGA-Europe. It is based on a survey to which nearly 300 LGBTI organisations responded, as well as interviews with 21 activists.

For further comment, contact: Ana Muñoz Padrós, ILGA-Europe: ana@ilga-europe.org, +32 493 35 60 55

The European Commission has put forward a legal initiative to extend the list of EU crimes to include hate speech, both online and offline, and hate crime, with clear understanding that LGBTI people must be protected.

Today, with its initiative to tackle hate crime and hate speech across the European Union, the EU Commission has recognised ever-growing violence and hate speech against LGBTI people by including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics (SOGIESC) as protected grounds in the second step of the initiative.  

By naming SOGIESC explicitly in the hate crime and hate speech initiative, the Commission has drawn attention to the prevalence of bias motivated violence and incitement against LGBTI people due to historical and structural discrimination and oppression, and sends a signal to the criminal justice system, potential perpetrators and victims of hate crime or hate speech that hate crime and hate speech against LGBTI people should be taken seriously. 

On 16 September this year, the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen announced, in her State of the Union Address at the European Parliament a new initiative on extending the list of EU crimes to all forms of hate crime and hate speech – whether because of race, religion, gender or sexuality. It was further mentioned in the Commission Work Programme 2021 and in February 2021, the Commission published a roadmap on the initiative, scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2021.

As it is noted in a letter sent by the ILGA-Europe, OII Europe and TGEU to President von der Leyen, only by the explicit inclusion can existing protection gaps be closed across the EU and LGBTI phobic hate crime be tackled effectively. A number of reports show that in places where discrimination against LGBTI people prevails, the provision of a general legal protection often leads to disadvantageous application of the law against this group.

Welcoming the explicit inclusion of SOGIESC in the initiative, Akram Kubanychbekov, Senior Advocacy Officer with ILGA-Europe said: “Considering the prevalence of hate speech and hate crime against LGBTI people in the EU, it is critical that the EU finally recognises bias-motivated violence and speech against LGBTI people.

“This will establish a legislative framework to work towards real change in society, where right of LGBTI people are fully respected on equal footing with others. It will also allow to develop policies at the EU and national levels on preventing bias motivated violence, advance support services for victims of such crimes and training staff of the criminal justice system among others.”

Background information:

Article 83(1) TFEU provides for an exhaustive list of areas of particularly serious crime with a cross-border dimension (known as ‘list of EU crimes’) for which the European Parliament and the Council may establish minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions. Under Article 83(1), third subparagraph, based on ‘developments in crime’, the Council may adopt unanimously a decision (subject to the consent of the Parliament) extending this list by adding other areas of crime. The Commission presented this initiative to trigger such Council decision, through a Communication to the European Parliament and the Council.

Adoption of the decision of the Council to identify hate speech and hate crime as “other areas of crime” will serve as a legal basis for the next step: adoption of a directive or regulation setting standards for the prosecution of such crimes, recognition of the protected characteristics, and the protection of victims of the bias motivated violence or incitement to discrimination across the EU.  Second step will go through the ordinary legislative procedure.  

This initiative will complement the work on a legislative proposal on preventing and combatting gender-based violence against women and domestic violence to be presented at the beginning of 2022 and the proposal for a Digital Services Act.

ILGA-Europe have provided input to numerous open and targeted consultations on the topic this year and closely supported the Commission’s work on this initiative.

The full text of the Communication to the European Parliament and the Council can be read here.

ILGA-Europe,  OII Europe, and TGEU urge the European Commission to acknowledge the existing prevalence of the violence and incitement to discrimination against LGBTI people, through naming SOGIGESC explicitly as protected grounds in the upcoming EU-level hate crime and hate speech legal initiative.

Dear Commission President von der Leyen,

As organisations working for an equal and inclusive Europe for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex people, we would like to raise our concerns regarding the upcoming initiative of the European Commission on extending the list of EU crimes to all forms of hate crime and hate speech.

In recent years, hate speech and hate crime targeting persons and organisations based on sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and sex characteristics have increased globally, and also across the European Union.

Given this increasingly alarming context, we would like to thank you for your strong message of support for our community and commitment to advancing equality for LGBTI people, from your State of the Union speech last September to the adoption of the first ever EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy in November. The clear commitments to provide protection from hate crime and hate speech on extended grounds, including hate against LGBTI people are important signals that the European Commission stands firm on the protection of rights LGBTI people. 

As the European Commission is at the finalisation stage of the initiative on extending the list of EU crimes to all forms of hate crime and hate speech, ILGA-Europe, TGEU and OII Europe are  urging you and the College of Commissioners to stay true to the commitment made by you and Commissioner Dalli on several occasions to ensure the protection of LGBTI people against hate crimes, by including the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics explicitly in the proposed extension. Only by the explicit inclusion can existing protection gaps be closed across the EU and LGBTI phobic hate crime be tackled effectively. In the situation, where bias and discrimination against the group is prevalent in general society, provision of general legal protection often leads to disadvantageous application of the law against these group.

Over the last years, we have been seeing targeted attacks against trans people and their rights, which mis-characterise the fight for equality of trans people as promotion of so-called “gender ideology”. In a targeted campaign of ultra-conservative forces against women’s rights as well as LGBTI rights, trans people are being targeted and made even more vulnerable, as the unleashing of transphobic hate speech often translates in violence and hate crimes against them. In addition, intersex people and intersex organisations have become increasingly a target of intersexphobic hate speech. These attacks are carried out by the same ultra-conservative actors and focus on the person having a variation of sex characteristics or the organisation working for intersex people’s rights.

The 2019 FRA LGBTI survey, clearly documented the overproportionate rise in hate crimes and hate speech against trans and intersex people. 17% of trans and 22% of intersex respondents experienced physical or sexual attacks, while 48% of trans and 42% of intersex people experienced harassment, registering the highest rates among the LGBTI population. The impact of hate crime and hate speech also proved to be disproportionately harmful for trans and intersex victims: 58% of trans and 54% of intersex respondents reported suffering from psychological problems and 48% of intersex and 39% of trans respondents felt limited in their freedom of movement, as a result of the attack.  TGEUs global Trans Murder Monitoring showed that the last year has been the deadliest since the beginning of recordings with 357 reported cases; moreover 96% of murdered trans people globally were trans women and trans feminine persons.

In the light of the extreme rise in transphobia and the well-documented impact it is having on trans and intersex people, it would be a very negative signal if the Commission was to propose an extension of protection against hate crimes which does not explicit include the grounds of gender identity and sex characteristics. It would be a serious disappointment to the communities that are looking to the Commission to finally get protection of their rights, on equal footing with everyone else, following the strong commitments to the protection on trans and intersex rights in the EU LGBTIQ Strategy. It would also send a very dangerous message to all those actors who are fuelling hatred, that trans and intersex people remain a legitimate target of their hateful speech, as trans and intersex people would continue to be unprotected.

The European Commission has shown in the past that it is possible to ensure legal protection of trans and intersex people, by explicitly including gender identity and gender expression in EU legislation. The Victims’ Rights Directive has set the standard, by providing protection to LGBTI victims of crimes beyond sexual orientation by including gender identity and gender expression as protected grounds. FRA has also interpreted the Directive as inclusive of intersex people, which is in line with the core objective of this legal instrument, aimed at protecting all victims of crime, in respect of the non-discrimination principle. The new initiative on the extension of Eurocrimes cannot fall behind the standards previously set, and therefore it needs to explicitly include gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics. Without recognition of bias-motivated violence and hate speech against LGBTI people, victims of such crimes are left out of the protection.   

It is crucial to provide an effective legislative protection for LGBTI people by acknowledging the existing prevalence of the violence and incitement to discrimination against them through naming sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics explicitly in the EU level hate crime and hate speech legal initiative.  

We are calling up on you to take effective and meaningful action to ensure that safety and dignity of LGBTI people are fully protected in the upcoming hate crime and hate speech initiative of the Commission, adding that we at ILGA-Europe, TGEU and OII Europe remain fully and firmly committed to supporting the European Commission in its work, wherever we can.

The murders of 375 trans and gender-diverse people were reported between October 2020 and September 2021, according to the latest Trans Murder Monitoring (TMM) update, and 2021 is set to be the deadliest year for trans communities since TGEU began collecting data. We say the names of those whose lives were cut short in our region, with a view towards a world where all trans people can live in equality, freedom and peace.

Violence against trans people is a continually growing issue that’s reaching record levels. This year, TGEU has accounted the highest number of trans and gender-diverse people whose lives have been cut short since the organisation began to collect data in 2008. The murders of 375 trans and gender-diverse people have been reported in the past 12 months, 7% more than in 2020, which was already a 6% increase from the previous update.

14 of the murders took place in Europe and one in Kazakhstan. 43% of the trans people killed in the region were migrants. Worldwide, Brazil remains the deadliest country of all. Other global facts include:

• 96% of those murdered globally were trans women or transfeminine people
• 58% of murdered trans people whose occupation is known were sex workers
• 36% of the murders took place on the street and 24% in their own place of residence
• The average age of those murdered is 30 years old; the youngest being 13 years old and the oldest 68 years old

These numbers are just a glimpse into the actual scenario, as most cases are not reported and those which are recorded receive little attention. TGEU warns of a “worrying trend when it comes to the intersections of misogyny, racism, xenophobia, and hate towards sex workers, with the majority of victims being Black and migrant trans women of colour, and trans sex workers”.

Say their names

Trans Day of Remembrance is marked each November 20 to commemorate trans people whose lives were lost as a result of anti-trans violence. It is important not to forget that behind the numbers there were actual individuals who had families, friends, a history and a future. To honour their memories, TGEU has also collected their names and how they died. Here you will find a list of those whose lives were brutally and needlessly cut short in Europe and Central Asia after transphobic attacks.

• Nuray Nuriyev, 27 years old. Baku, Azerbaijan
• Paula Migeon, 50 years old. Reims, France
• Ambre Audrey Istier, 50 years old. Isère, France
• Ivanna Angeline Macedo, 28 years old. Paris, France
• Dimitra Kalogiannis, 64 years old. Athens, Greece
• N.N., 30 years old. Piacenza, Italy
• Adrieli. Rome, Italy
• Dzhakonda. Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan
• Angelita Seixas Alves Correia, 31 years old. Matosinhos, Portugal.
• Viktoria (Vika) Basakovskaya, 23 years old. Novosibirsk region, Russia
• Iratxe Otero, 29 years old. Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain.
• Selin Aynaci, 42 years old, Antalya, Turkey.
• Mira? Güne?, 36 years old. Izmir, Turkey
• Pamela ‘Pam’. Turkey
• Kadir Murat Sözübir, 42 years old. Fatih, Turkey

These names, these lives and those of the 360 other trans and gender-diverse people whose murders were reported, and all of those who have gone un-reported, are a stark reminder of why continually mounting violence against trans people needs to be condemned by policymakers, civil society, and society at large in the strongest possible terms. We join in mourning the lives lost and commit to continuing to fight for the world we want to see, where all trans and gender-diverse people live full and equal lives in freedom and in peace.

Over the past number of years, LGBTI people have come under increasing attack from ruling politicians, religious leaders and other public figures in Poland. This has come in the form of dangerous and false framing of LGBTI people as a threat to children, and as a threat to Christianity.

We have created and will be updating this abbreviated timeline of what’s been happening over the past two years with the rise of official homophobia and transphobia.

LGBTI asylum seekers are often at risk of additional danger because of their SOGIESC during their journey and upon arrival in the country where they seek asylum, which can take the form of harassment, exclusion, sexual violence, or other forms of violence. Often but not always, they qualify as vulnerable persons with specific needs in legal assistance, reception conditions, healthcare, and others throughout the asylum process.

Since the Taliban have come back to power in Afghanistan, leading to a humanitarian crisis as thousands try to flee the country, ILGA-Europe and several European human rights organisations are alarmed and deeply worried about the security of people, especially women and minorities, including LGBTI people. Here are five responses the EU and its member states must engage in to protect Afghans at risk.

After 20 years out of power, the Taliban, whose interpretation of Sharia law poses a major threat to women and minorities, rule Afghanistan once more. Back in 2001, in response to the 9/11 attacks, the US intervened in the Talbian’s brutal rule. The organisation had offered its protection to Osama Bin Laden, who was responsible for the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington. While a new Afghan government took over in 2004, the Taliban attacks never went away. Fast forward to the summer of 2021, and as American troops got ready to leave Afghanistan, in line with an agreement made by former President Donald Trump, the Taliban took over the main cities, and finally the capital, Kabul, installing themselves back in power. President Joe Biden has confirmed that US troops will exit the country by August 31. Women and minorities, including LGBTI people, are at high risk under the Taliban’s extremist regime. Many are fleeing in desperation.

The vast majority of displaced Afghans will likely be hosted in neighbouring countries. Since 2015, 570,000 Afghans have sought protection in the EU and associated countries. The majority received protection status. In contrast, by July 2021, Iran had hosted 800,000 registered refugees and up to 3 million other displaced Afghans. In Pakistan, there were 1.4 million registered refugees and up to 2 million other displaced Afghans. These figures have been increasing by the day. In addition, there are close to 5.5 million internally displaced people in the country.

It is crucial that the small proportion of displaced people who do arrive in Europe are given rapid access to a fair asylum procedure in line with European states’ obligations under EU and international law.

Here are five urgent responses the EU and its member states must engage in to protect Afghans at risk:

1. Evacuate as many of the people facing immediate security risks as possible, as quickly as possible

This is the immediate priority, which should then be followed by expansion of resettlement and complementary pathways for those most at risk and most vulnerable. A particular focus should be on women and girls and their immediate family members. Attention should also be paid to the situation of minorities, including LGBTI people, where they are at additional and immediate risk of persecution.

Europe should continue the critical efforts to establish and implement safe and regular routes to protection, including for those who have worked for European institutions and agencies (military, diplomatic and civil society) in Afghanistan, and those at immediate risk after the Taliban takeover. Information on how to apply should be clear and procedures should be as simple as possible, taking into account that people are on the move, may have limited internet access and are using mobile phones to apply, and that they may have struggled to obtain or lost their original documents on the journey.

Family reunification is a crucial safe route to protection, and has untapped potential to be used in emergency situations. Implementing existing commitments and legal obligations on family reunion is a priority, including allowing safe routes and the necessary documentation for those seeking to apply and for those who have already been accepted. In addition, temporary programmes with a widened scope of family definitions to include more family members and an easing of evidential requirements (such as provision of documents that may be impossible to acquire) should all be considered. Similarly, complementary pathways, such as private sponsorship, student scholarships and humanitarian visa programmes should be rapidly expanded, especially given the willingness of communities, institutions and organisations to support Afghans.

2. Scale up provision of humanitarian assistance

It is necessary to rapidly scale up coordinated humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan itself, via independent organisations still able to operate, and to the neighbouring countries. Preserving access for humanitarian actors should be incorporated into international negotiations and international responses. In particular, critical services for women and girls must continue to be delivered, and this requires female aid workers who are able to access communities and create safe spaces for women and girls.

It should be noted, however, that humanitarian assistance in the region is not a substitute for Europe offering protection in line with EU and international obligations. Nor is it a means to deter those who are vulnerable and at risk from pursuing a safe route to protection.

3. Re-establish security for the people of Afghanistan

Use the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and other EU external action, including diplomatic efforts, civilian crisis management, sanctions and other operational tools, to support security for Afghans and international peace negotiations.

The EU should support engagement of all relevant international actors, including those supporting proxies in Afghanistan and with interests there, in efforts to stabilise the situation. Dialogue with all relevant actors in Afghanistan when it is in the interests of the people of Afghanistan is important. However, apart from humanitarian assistance, all other forms of cooperation with any potential future government should be conditional on respect for the fundamental rights of all Afghans, in line with the international obligations of Afghanistan and of the EU. It also has to be ensured that potential sanctions do not negatively affect the ability to provide humanitarian aid.

The objective of EU foreign and security support and operations should be the security of Afghans and protection of civilians in the short-term and peace in the long-term for the people of Afghanistan. This should be prioritised over counter-terrorism, anti-migration or otherwise narrowly defined European interests.

When the immediate crisis has abated, a thorough evaluation of the EU’s role in the international efforts in Afghanistan must also take place, in order to inform future Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and wider CFSP actions. The current situation is a test for the European External Action Service and it should lead Europe’s response.

4. Ensure rapid access to fair asylum procedure in Europe now

European countries must provide rapid access to fair asylum procedures for the small proportion of displaced Afghans who seek protection here. The practice of pushbacks and collective expulsions of Afghans (and other nationalities) at European borders must stop. Resources and attention should focus on preparations, such as ensuring that asylum systems are functioning including with adequate reception space — as they should be in any case.

Examination of cases already in asylum systems must take into account the reality on the ground and re-examination of decided asylum cases should take place, given the dramatic changes in the situation in country. We strongly support the initiatives already taken by some Member States in this regard but express dismay that some countries have frozen decision-making in open cases.

It is particularly worrying and dangerous the insular approach of certain European politicians who seek to make the situation about “us”, Europe, and the small impact that will be had here, rather than keeping the focus on the security and humanitarian needs of Afghans.

5. Halt deportations to Afghanistan

It was not safe to deport people to Afghanistan before the Taliban takeover; now it is certainly not the case and courts will — rightly — halt deportations. Asylum and other cases where human rights concerns preclude deportation need to be reviewed in light of current developments. It can be assumed that the majority will meet the criteria for international protection. Alternatives to deportation and related detention need to be considered, including providing legal statuses and the right to remain; decision-making should not be put on hold.

As European NGOs working on asylum and migration and Afghan Diaspora organisations in Europe, we are alarmed about the situation in Afghanistan and concerned above all about the security of the people of Afghanistan, both those within the country and those displaced and seeking protection in the region and beyond.

The vast majority of displaced Afghans will likely be hosted in the neighbouring countries, as has been the case over decades of displacement from Afghanistan. For reference, since 2015, over six years, 570,000 Afghans sought protection in the EU and associated countries. The majority received a protection status. In contrast, by July 2021, Iran hosted 800,000 registered refugees and up to 3 million other displaced Afghans. In Pakistan, there were 1.4 million registered refugees and up to 2 million other displaced Afghans. These figures have been increasing by the day. In addition, there are close to 5.5 million IDPs in the country.

In this context, it is crucial that the small proportion of displaced people who do arrive in Europe are given rapid access to a fair asylum procedure in line with European states’ obligations under EU and international law.

We recommend the following five urgent responses for the EU and European countries:

1. Evacuation, resettlement and other safe routes to protection for Afghans

Evacuate as many as possible of the people facing immediate security risks, as quickly as possible.

This is the immediate priority, to then be followed by expansion of resettlement and complementary pathways for those most at risk and most vulnerable. A particular focus should be on women and girls and their (immediate) family members. Attention should also be paid to the situation of minorities where they are at additional and immediate risk of persecution.

Europe should continue the critical efforts to establish and implement safe and regular routes to protection, including for those who have worked for European institutions and agencies (military, diplomatic and civil society) in Afghanistan, and those at immediate risk after the Taliban takeover. Information on how to apply should be clear and procedures should be as simple as possible, taking into account that people are on the move, may have limited internet access and using mobile phones to apply, and that they may have struggled to obtain or lost their original documents on the journey.

We welcome the approach of European countries to bringing people to Europe, and the clear statement from High Representative Borrell that people cannot be abandoned and must be offered shelter in the EU. We support continued coordination by European nations to ensure this happens, and urge a wide approach covering as many as possible from at-risk groups, including journalists, human rights defenders, those who worked for the international community, those funded by but not directly employed by EU programmes, and those who were promoted by or visibly supported by international actors.

We note that family reunification is a crucial safe route to protection, and has untapped potential to be used in emergency situations. Implementing existing commitments and legal obligations on family reunion is a priority, including allowing safe routes and the necessary documentation for those seeking to apply and for those who have already been accepted. In addition, temporary programmes with a widened scope of family definitions to include more family members and an easing of evidential requirements (such as provision of documents that may be impossible to acquire) should all be considered. Similarly, complementary pathways, such as private sponsorship, student scholarships and humanitarian visa programmes should be rapidly expanded, especially given the willingness of communities, institutions and organisations to support Afghans.

2. Humanitarian assistance

Scale up provision of humanitarian assistance.

In line with calls from international organisations and humanitarian actors in the region, it is necessary to rapidly scale up coordinated humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan itself, via independent humanitarian organisations still able to operate, and to the neighbouring countries via all relevant actors. Preserving access for humanitarian actors should be incorporated into international negotiations and international responses. In particular, critical services for women and girls must continue to be delivered, and this requires female aid workers who are able to access communities and create safe spaces for women and girls.

It should be noted, however, that humanitarian assistance in the region is not a substitute for Europe offering protection in line with EU and international obligations. Nor is it a means to deter those who are vulnerable and at risk from pursuing a safe route to protection.

3. Re-establish security for the people of Afghanistan.

Use the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and other EU external action, including diplomatic efforts, civilian crisis management, sanctions and other operational tools, to support security for Afghans and international peace negotiations.

The EU should support engagement of all relevant international actors, including those supporting proxies in Afghanistan and with interests there, in efforts to stabilise the situation. Dialogue with all relevant actors in Afghanistan when it is in the interests of the people of Afghanistan is important. However, apart from humanitarian assistance, all other forms of cooperation with any potential future government should be conditional on respect for the fundamental rights of all Afghans, in line with the international obligations of Afghanistan and of the EU. It also has to be ensured that potential sanctions do not negatively affect the ability to provide humanitarian aid.

The objective of EU foreign and security support and operations should be the security of Afghans and protection of civilians in the short-term and peace in the long-term for the people of Afghanistan. This should be prioritised over counter-terrorism, anti-migration or otherwise narrowly defined European interests.

When the immediate crisis has abated, a thorough evaluation of the EU’s role in the international efforts in Afghanistan must also take place, in order to inform future Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and wider CFSP actions. The current situation is a test for the European External Action Service and it should lead Europe’s response.

4. Access to asylum in Europe

Ensure rapid access to fair asylum procedure; preparations should be made in Europe now.

European countries must provide rapid access to fair asylum procedures for the small proportion of displaced Afghans who seek protection here. EU and international obligations to offer protection to those in need should be respected. The practice of pushbacks and collective expulsions of Afghans (and other nationalities) at European borders must stop. Even before the significant deterioration of the security situation, the majority of Afghans arriving in Europe received a protection status. In addition, the likely number of arrivals is manageable. Resources and attention should focus on preparations, such as ensuring that asylum systems are functioning including with adequate reception space – as they should be in any case.

Examination of cases already in asylum systems must take into account the reality on the ground and re-examination of decided asylum cases should take place, given the dramatic changes in the situation in country. We strongly support the initiatives already taken by some Member States in this regard but express dismay that some countries have frozen decision-making in open cases.

We condemn the insular approach of certain European politicians who seek to make the situation about “us”, Europe, and the small impact that will be had here, rather than keeping the focus on the security and humanitarian needs of Afghans. We further condemn the use of the situation to stoke panic and fear about people seeking protection, as is their right. It is particularly self-serving to instrumentalise the situation in Afghanistan to pursue pre-existing proposals to prevent or reduce access to protection in Europe.

Fear-mongering about the small proportion of the displaced who may arrive in Europe:

• creates insecurity for Afghans in Europe and elsewhere;
• legitimises and encourages border closures, including outside Europe, that prevent people fleeing to safety;
• is highly counter-productive. Europe needs to do its fair share in supporting displaced people. Otherwise the neighbouring countries will no longer be willing or able to host the vast majority of those displaced from Afghanistan.

We wish to underline that the EU, Turkey and countries neighbouring Afghanistan should all offer protection to Afghans fleeing from Afghanistan, hosting those in need in safety and dignity. However, Turkey, already the largest refugee hosting country in the world, cannot be considered a safe country of asylum for Afghans; there is no possible legal argument that can be advanced to support such a claim. Ongoing efforts to persuade Turkey to take on additional responsibilities are misguided and are out of step with responsibility sharing committed to by EU Member States in the Global Compact on Refugees.

Any efforts to close borders and forcibly prevent the movement of displaced people undermine the global protection system and directly contribute to serious harm to people seeking protection. Ultimately, protection in other regions, including in the countries neighbouring Afghanistan is dependent on the EU taking on a fair sharing of responsibility for displaced people, given that the willingness of other countries to host displaced people will be eroded if Europe aims to prevent all arrivals.

5. Suspending deportations to Afghanistan

Halt deportations to Afghanistan.

It was not safe to deport people to Afghanistan before the Taliban takeover; now it is certainly not the case and courts will – rightly – halt deportations. Asylum and other cases where human rights concerns preclude deportation need to be reviewed in light of current developments. It can be assumed that the majority will meet the criteria for international protection. Alternatives to deportation and related detention need to be considered, including providing legal statuses and the right to remain; decision-making should not be put on hold.

Signatories

#DiasporaVote!; 11.11.11; ACT Church of Sweden; aditus foundation; Afghan Action U.K.; Afghan Youth Association in Denmark; Africa Solidarity Centre Ireland; Associazione Consulenza Economica per migranti e rifugiati (ACEIR); AsyLex; Bureau for Rights-Based Development (BRD)-Sverige; Center my Right for Supporting Rights and Freedoms – Geneva; Centre for Peace Studies; Child Circle; CIRÉ (Coordination et Initiatives pour Réfugiés et Étrangers); Conselho Português para os Refugiados – CPR (Portuguese Refugee Council); Defence for Children International Greece; Donate and Educate Foundation; Donate and Educate girls; Eurodiakonia; European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE); European Evangelical Alliance; European Lawyers in Lesvos (ELIL); French Refugee Council; Generation Outside Afghanistan; Hakunila International Organization, Vantaa – Finland; HIAS Europe; HIAS Greece; ICMC Europe; ILGA-Europe; Interkulturelles Entwicklungs-Zentrum (IEZ); Irish Refugee Council; JRS Europe; Kids in Need of Defense (KIND); Lesvos Solidarity; Ligue des droits humains (Human Rights League, Belgium); Mosaico-azioni per i rifugiati; New Women Connectors; NOAS; Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC); Oxfam; PICUM; PRO ASYL; Refugees International; Swiss Refugee Council; Symbiosis-School of Political Studies; The European Coalition  ?of Migrants and Refugees; The Swedish Network of Refugee Support Groups, FARR; Vluchtelinenwerk Vlaanderen; WE organization NL; World Hazara Council (WHC); YAAR

Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatovic has issued a powerful comment, clarifying that LGBTI people are being used as a political pawns by ultra-conservative leaders in more and more European countries, and that in turn the human rights and freedom of everyone are being undermined. Here’s what she had to say.

“World Pride is being celebrated on our continent this week, but a surge in intolerance towards LGBTI people in Europe is nothing to be proud about,” said Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatovic in the opening paragraph of a powerful comment, published on August 16. She went on to warn that public officials “are failing in their duty to promote equal dignity and human rights for all.”

The Commissioner for Human Rights is an independent institution established by the Council of Europe. Its mission is to protect human rights across Europe, pursuing direct dialogue with authorities in each state, providing advice and raising awareness, and supporting the work of human rights defenders.

Issuing comments is one of her tools towards these goals. The latest one is a strong message of support to all LGBTI communities on the European continent and a wake-up call at a time when politicians and public officials are blatantly targeting LGBTI people for their own political gain.

Here are the Commissioner’s nine main statements about the manipulation of LGBT rights by ultra-conservative politicians to gain power in Europe:

1.“Scapegoating LGBTI minorities has become a tactic applied by ultra-conservative and nationalist politicians posing as defenders of so-called “traditional values” to strengthen their base and gain or stay in power. I have observed that stigmatisation of LGBTI people is particularly pronounced in the run-up to elections and votes.”

2.“In addition to mobilising certain categories of voters, the exploitation of societal homo/transphobia has proven a convenient way to divert public attention away from government failure to address pressing social issues and rising inequalities, and broader attacks underway on human rights and democracy.”

3.“Anti-gender movement actors seek to blur the lines for their audience by adopting the vocabulary of human rights, but what they are doing in reality is working to deprive other groups — mainly women and LGBTI people — of their rights.”

4.“By permeating the political scene, the anti-gender movements are increasingly well-placed to erode the protection of human rights in Europe. It is urgent to acknowledge this fact and take steps to counter it.”

5.“Targeting LGBTI people for political gain is a costly strategy which harms the lives and well-being of those affected and undermines social cohesion in general. When public officials and elected politicians employ intolerant rhetoric, this signals to others that they too can engage in hateful actions with impunity.”

6.“Stigmatisation and political manipulation of LGBTI issues rarely stops at words; it often goes on to adversely affect how LGTBI rights are protected at policy level and by law […] Bills that should be uncontroversial have spurred heated political debate. For example, in Italy, a bill ensuring that sexual orientation and gender identity are mentioned along with other grounds in a law prohibiting hate speech and hate crimes, has been blocked for months.”

7.“As clearly established by the European Court of Human Rights, hate speech against LGBTI people is not protected by freedom of expression, and neither is it by freedom of belief.”

8.“Political parties and parliaments should adopt codes of ethics that prohibit and punish homophobic and transphobic hate speech. Public representatives should systematically condemn homophobic and transphobic speech. There must be no impunity for particularly serious cases of incitement to hatred and violence by politicians.”

9.“Human rights are universal and indivisible: ensuring that everyone in society can enjoy them is the key to cohesive, peaceful societies where everyone can strive. Pitting groups of people against each other breeds tensions, hate and violence — only serving the narrow interests of some unscrupulous politicians.”

The COVID-19 pandemic and the political responses to it have hit already beleaguered LGBTI asylum seekers in Europe particularly hard. We report on the alarming impact.

“The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted everyone, but not everyone has been impacted has been impacted in the same way,” said moderator Luna Liboni at the opening of the first panel of the ‘COVID-19 and Queer Asylum Symposium’ on April 29. This is particularly true in the case of LGBTIQ persons seeking asylum and refugees in Europe, a community who already faced a double stigma and discrimination in host countries before the health crisis started.

“The EU has been too slow in the context of COVID-19,” said Professor of Law Nuno Ferreira at the symposium. “Queer refugees and asylum seekers have been absent at the debate.”

Across Europe, sexual and gender minorities can ask for international protection. However, according to findings of the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) in 2017, the implementation of EU asylum directives varies greatly across the region. Furthermore, there are no official statistics on the number of asylum claims based on sexual orientation or gender identity, while only a few countries in the EU have specific national guidelines for interviewing LGBTI asylum seekers.

Panellists Jonathan Mastellari, Leila Zadeh and Anbid Zaman compared the situation for LGBTIQ asylum seekers since March 2020 in the UK, Italy and Germany. Here is what the three countries have in common:

Higher risk of isolation and trauma re-triggering

The forced isolation of lockdowns re-triggered trauma in LGBTIQ asylum seekers. Many LGBTIQ asylum seekers were already distanced from their families and had arrived on their own to the host country. During the lockdowns, organisations providing support and access to the LGBTI community could do very limited work. Locked up with strangers, LGBTIQ asylum seekers were not able to talk openly or be free to themselves. Refugee camps and properties assigned to asylum seekers are often rural and far from the cities, increasing the risk of isolation by cutting LGBTI refugees and asylum seekers from access to LGBTI spaces and community.

Overcrowded centres and greater exposure to violence

In the three countries, people in refugee centres were living very close to each other at a time when it was important to keep distance. Not only would this expose asylum seekers to a higher risk of infection, but also made LGBTI people in the centres more vulnerable to verbal abuse, harassment and degrading treatment. In the UK, detention centres stopped releasing asylum seekers and suspended deportations. As a result, centres continue to be overcrowded. It was reported that some people were sharing beds in hotels and other initial accommodations. All this exposed LGBTI asylum seekers to increased harassment. In Italy, LGBTI asylum seekers experiencing violence in their homes could not access centres of protection.

Difficulties accessing HIV treatment and trans healthcare

Accessing trans-affirming healthcare was already challenging for trans asylum seekers before the pandemic. The lockdowns, limitations on mobility, and the cutting of services at medical centres have pushed trans asylum seekers and asylum seekers living with HIV to interrupt their treatments.

Before the pandemic

The situation of LGBTI asylum seekers before the pandemic hit was already beset by issues. Here are the main findings by the Fundamental Rights Agency in 2017:

• There are no official statistics on the number of asylum claims based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• Only a few EU Member States have specific national guidelines for interviewing LGBTI persons.
• Civil society representatives note that eligibility interviews are often too short and lack specific attention to persecution based on sexual orientation or gender identity. According to NGOs, asylum officers tend to have stereotypical views on sexual orientation and gender identity. Support from civil society has a significant impact on the appropriate handling of asylum cases and applicants’ openness towards asylum authorities.
• In most EU Member States there are no special accommodation facilities for LGBTI persons, but special measures — such as transfers to single rooms — can often be taken in case of abuse or harassment. However, civil society emphasises the need to take preventive measures.
• Training on specific LGBTI vulnerabilities is provided to reception centre staff randomly, usually by relevant NGOs. Information leaflets from NGOs are often available, but usually not in all needed languages.
• Most incidents of violence or harassment motivated by bias against LGBTI asylum seekers are not reported and are not recorded as such.
• There are insufficient guidelines on the provision of specific healthcare (e.g. hormonal treatment) to transgender persons who already started treatment in their countries of origin. The interruption of treatment in such cases can have severe consequences.

Reporting from country after country provides a glaring clarification that progress which has been taken for granted is not only increasingly fragile, but particularly vulnerable to exploitation by anti-human rights forces.

In this episode of The Frontline, we get an overview of the stark situation from ILGA-Europe’s Advocacy Director, Katrin Hugendubel. Executive Director of Transgender Europe (TGEU) talks to us about the significant growth of opposition towards trans rights across Europe; and Executive Director of ILGA-Portugal, and Marta Ramos tells us about the rise of the anti-gender movement in her country, and the ways in which LGBTI organisations have had to skew their work during the COVID-19 pandemic towards provision of basic necessities like food and shelter as many governments left LGBTI people out of their relief packages.

Listen below or click here to listen and subscribe to The Frontline on your favourite podcast platform.

Together with the under-signed organisations we call on the European Union to adopt a forward-thinking and truly inclusive approach to gender-based violence – that leaves no one behind and strives to achieve real change in the lives of all people, without discrimination.

To meaningfully address gender-based violence in the European Union, we must promote inclusion, safety, protection, well-being and effective remedies for those most at risk.

In the lead up to International Women’s Day, 8 March, and the expected publication of a draft EU law to address violence against women and domestic violence, the under-signed organisations have adopted this manifesto for a truly inclusive EU law and policy. We welcome the leadership of the European Commission in taking action, and the engagement of the European Parliament, and urge everyone who will be involved in this effort to take an inclusive and intersectional feminist approach.

People facing marginalisation and intersectional discrimination – such as racialised women, women with disabilities, sex workers, those of lower socio-economic status, experiencing homelessness, with precarious or irregular migration status, as well as people with diverse sexual orientation, gender identities and expressions and sex characteristics including trans and non-binary people, are among the most at risk of gender-based violence and least protected and supported by existing efforts to prevent and tackle violence and other harm. 

Measures that aim to address gender-based violence by focusing on increasing criminalisation, policing and incarceration can make many people and communities more vulnerable, reproducing structural, institutional and interpersonal discrimination and violence.

We urge the European Union decision makers to strive for an ambitious and comprehensive package of legal, policy and financial measures to address gender-based violence and to ensure victims’ rights that:

• Centres the perspectives, concerns and recommendations of those facing multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination.
• Takes an intersectional and rights-based approach, recognising that to achieve gender equality and freedom from gender-based violence and protect fundamental rights for all, we have to address all forms of violence, in particular when linked to gender, gender identity and expression, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, age, disability, class, religion and migration status, and that those who experience intersectional discrimination face greater vulnerability to all forms of gender-based violence and domestic violence.
• Addresses structural and historical harms and drivers of gender-based violence, and underlying issues such as poverty and oppression, including those created, enabled and normalised by states.
  • Addresses the laws, policies, practices and by-laws that discourage and prevent victims from reporting – such as those that criminalise aspects of sex work including clients, migration and homelessness – or that deny survivors access to essential sexual and reproductive health services, as well as gender-based and intersectional violence perpetrated by police. 
  • This requires review and reform of such laws, policies, practices and by-laws as well as specific measures to promote inclusion, safety, well-being, remedy and reparations for particularly affected groups, including in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, where the increased powers of the police and requirement to present personal identity and vaccination documents increase the risk of policing of marginalised groups.

• Prioritises a social, community and survivor-centred approach over further criminalisation, invests in holistic social and support services, including mental health and sexual and reproductive health care, social protection and harm reduction, information provision, community interventions, and mechanisms that enable people to access services, remedies and stability, including residence status, without conditions or requirements to engage with law enforcement and the criminal legal system. Ensures that all women as well as people with diverse sexual orientation, gender identities and expressions and sex characteristics fleeing violence are able to access safe, suitable and stable accommodation and other support services without furthering the cycle of abuse. 
• Addresses harmful practices such as female genital mutilation; human trafficking; and non-consensual medical interventions such as forced abortion, forced contraception, forced sterilisation, intersex genital mutilation, forced gender reassignment, through this rights-based and intersectional feminist approach. 
• Ensures safety and protection for people who do wish to engage with authorities and with the criminal legal system, protection from secondary victimisation, including sanctions, penalties and immigration enforcement, and ensures accessibility of the justice system and procedural accommodation for victims, including people with disabilities. 
• Does not fall behind, and rather builds upon, existing European standards, including the Istanbul Convention and the Victims’ Rights Directive.

Sign now!

Signed by: 

• Amnesty International
• Center for Reproductive Rights
• European Federation of Organisations working with Homeless People (FEANTSA) 
• European Network Against Racism (ENAR)
• The European Region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe)
• European Sex Workers’ Rights Alliance  (ESWA)
• Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice (Equinox)
• Fair Trials
• International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN)
• La Strada International
• PICUM- Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants
• TGEU – Transgender Europe

RESOURCES:

Victoria Law: Against Carceral Feminism. 17.10.2014, Jacobin. Available here.

Towards Gender Justice Rethinking EU Gender Equality Policy From an Intersectional Perspective. Equinox- Initiative for Racial Justice, 2021. Available here.

 The EU Victims’ Rights Directive refers to gender-based violence as “violence that is directed against a person because of that person’s gender, gender identity or gender expression or that affects a person of a particular gender disproportionately. See more.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child found that Finland failed to consider the best interests of the child of a lesbian couple when assessing his asylum request. Now the country is under an obligation to provide reparation.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child found that Finland failed to consider the best interests of the child of a lesbian couple when rejecting his asylum request, and to protect him against a real risk of irreparable harm when the family had no other choice but to return to Russia.

“This is a ground-breaking decision: it is the first asylum-related case from the UN system involving a child who is facing specific risks on the grounds of his mother’s sexual orientation, and of the family they form together”, said Kseniya Kirichenko, Programme Coordinator at ILGA World. “This is also the first time that the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child made a decision on sexual orientation issues, and the first case on children in same-sex families in Treaty Bodies’ practice altogether”.

The Committee’s decision was informed by a third-party intervention submitted jointly by ILGA World, ILGA-Europe, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Child Rights International Network (CRIN) and Network of European LGBTIQ* Families Associations (NELFA).

The Committee’s decision concerned an application filed on behalf of A. B., now 11, who had fled Russia together with his mothers after the family faced harassment and threats, and he had started to suffer from bullying and isolation at school.  These were the years when regions across Russia had started to introduce so-called “anti-propaganda laws”, which have contributed to an increasingly hostile environment against people of diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions. Legislation that bars “promoting non-traditional sexual relationships” was eventually adopted in 2013 at the national level.

Fearing for their safety, the family fled to Finland, where the child started to attend school, made friends, and no longer had to live in fear of calling both of his parents “mother” and of talking to anyone about his family.  However, Finland rejected their application for asylum: authorities recognised the past experiences of threats, bullying and discrimination; nonetheless, they concluded that these could not be considered as amounting to persecution.

The family was left with no other choice but to return to Russia. However, the complaint against Finland reached the United Nations, where in February 2021 the Committee on the Rights of the Child concluded that Finland “failed to adequately take the best interests of the child as a primary consideration when assessing the author’s asylum request based on his mothers’ sexual orientation, and to protect him against a real risk of irreparable harm in case of return to the Russian Federation”.

“This is an important decision, setting out necessary standards for the protection of children in LGBTI families who are at heightened risk of discrimination, especially in countries like Russia, where LGBTI people face stigmatisation and hostilities in their everyday lives”, said Arpi Avetisyan, Head of Litigation at ILGA–Europe. “States must always ensure that the best interests of the child are effectively and systematically taken into account in the context of asylum proceedings, and that they are not discriminated based on their parents’ sexual orientation.”    

While finding Finland in violation of articles 3, 19, and 22 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the UN committee pointed out that the state “is under an obligation to provide an effective reparation to the author, including adequate compensation.”

The decision has the potential to bring about change. “In the past, we have seen that international decisions on lesbian, gay and bisexual asylum seekers actually led to giving the applicants residency in the respondent States”, concluded Kirichenko. “We hope that Finland will also ensure that this family will be able to come back and to finally have a happy and safe life”.

Notes for editors:

UN Treaty Bodies (Committees):  committees of independent experts appointed to review the implementation by State parties of an international human rights treaty.

Committee on the Rights of the Child:  part of the UN Treaty Bodies, it is a United Nations body of 18 Independent experts that monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child by its State parties.

More information about Treaty Bodies is available in ILGA World’s annual Treaty Bodies reports and strategic litigation toolkit. Recordings of ILGA World’s webinars on United Nations advocacy, including on Treaty Bodies, are available here.

---

Additional resources:

Press releases on the case

• Finnish Rainbow Families Association Sateenkaariperheet – Regnbågsfamiljer ry
• Finland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Media contacts:

• Daniele Paletta, ILGA World communications coordinator, media@ilga.org
• Ana Muñoz Padrós, ILGA-Europe communications officer, ana@ilga-europe.org
• Björn Sieverding, NELFA media team, media@nelfa.org

Throughout 2020, LGBTI activists have been harassed, intimidated and threatened by well-known far right groups in Ukraine, while police and local authorities turn a blind eye. Here is activist Anna Sharyhina’s alarming story, and how you can lend her and other LGBTI Ukrainian activists your support.

Two years ago, on New Year’s Eve, Anna Sharyhina gathered with friends and activists at the headquarters of Sphere, the LGBT organisation she cofounded and leads in the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv. At one point during the celebration Anna realised they were trapped. Thugs had padlocked the gate from outside. The group of friends feared the attackers would hurl smoke grenades in, as had occurred at PrideHub, Kharkiv’s LGBT+ friendly community centre. Little did Anna know that this would be the first of over 20 attacks she would both witness and suffer personally over the next two years.

Anna Sharyhina has been involved in LGBTI activism for over ten years and she is well-known in the community. This year she was part of organising the first ‘Pride on Wheels’ in Ukraine, a creative celebration of amid COVID-19 restrictions. Her active role in Kharkiv’s political, social and cultural life and her visibility in events and media, however, have come at a cost.

The police just stand by and watch

The façade of PrideHub, which is run by Anna and Sphere, has been covered with graffiti, featuring death threats and abusive language, and its windows have been shattered. Urine, feces, and blood have been smeared on its front door. At some events, groups of men have blocked the entrance locking their arms in a human chain. Activists and guests at the centre have been filmed and mocked online. Recently, a man handcuffed himself at the entrance, disrupting an activist event and barring participants from entering.

On this, as on other occasions, police officers passively stood by and watched. None of the complaints filed by LGBTI activists in Kharkiv have been followed up. Despite the evidence from the video surveillance system installed at PrideHub, no investigation has been carried out. By taking no action, police and local authorities are failing to protect citizens and their rights to freedom of association, assembly and expression, as well as ignoring Ukraine’s criminal code. Only at Pride celebrations, when the international community is watching, do the authorities provide actual protection.

Threats on her phone

The group behind the attacks is the far-right Tradition and Order. It has been active in different cities in Ukraine and is known for its use of violence and intimidation against those fighting for equality, gender diversity and women’s rights.

LGBTI organisations have been documenting the rise of organised violence against LGBTI activists, organisations and events for several years, calling for LGBTI-inclusive hate crime legislation. Ukraine has an obligation under the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement to introduce hate crime legislation that includes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected grounds.

Anna says she feels as if they are trapped in a locked room with their abusers, and everyone is looking away. Along with the attacks on Sphere, she receives threats on her phone on a regular basis. Allies and partner organisations who have been involved in projects with her, have also been intimidated. For example, a long-time partner organisation, an educational centre that’s openly LGBTI-friendly, received a group of visitors who threatened them with violence unless they stop their cooperation with Sphere.

Much of the harassment and intimidation seems to be centered on Anna, and follows the path of the projects and collaborations that feature her. The pressure intensified after a course that she taught on the prevention of bullying in schools. Violent opponents come to her lectures and discussions, disrupting them. This is especially threatening for people who are new to activism or to the topics at hand.

Dealing with this situation and reacting to attacks in an atmosphere of impunity is taking a great personal toll on Anna, on her colleagues and on Sphere’s work. They see themselves in a swim or sink situation, where swimming is getting harder and harder.

Here is what you can do to support Anna and the LGBTI community in Kharkiv, Ukraine

In this worrying scenario, Anna and her team continue to believe in their mission and commitment to the LGBTI community in Kharkiv and elsewhere. But dealing with security in the absence of any law enforcement takes more and more resources. Activists should not have to do this alone. You can help them by:

Spreading the word. Share Anna’s and Sphere’s story and help them stay in the spotlight until the Ukrainian authorities take action to prevent harassment and violence. Visibility helps!

Speaking up. Are you part of a human rights organisation or an activist initiative? Issue a statement or write an article about Anna’s and Sphere’s case. Tell Ukrainian and international political representatives that the violence and harassment against Anna Sharyhina, other LGBTI activists and their allies in Kharkiv must stop.

The following contacts in Ukraine can make a difference. They can make sure that the threats and attacks against Anna and Sphere are properly addressed by the police. They can prevent further threats and violence by publicly condemning violence against LGBTI and other human rights defenders and sending a clear signal that it will not be tolerated.

Contact them with your statements, tag them in your posts, and tell them that it is time to take action:

• Liudmila Denisova, Human Rights Ombudsperson: https://www.facebook.com/denisovaombudsman/
• Igor Terekhov, Acting Mayor of Kharkiv: https://www.facebook.com/igor.terehov.kh
• Alyona Stryzhak, Head of the Kharkiv Patrol Police Department: https://www.facebook.com/alyona.stryzhak.9
• Andriy Rubel, Chief of the Main Directorate of the National Police: https://www.facebook.com/people/%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D1%96%D0%B9-%D0%A0%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C/100059591866063
• Serhiy Knyazev, Adviser to the Minister of Interior: https://www.facebook.com/sergii.knyazev
• Arsen Avakov, Minister of the Interior: https://www.facebook.com/arsen.avakov.1

Asylum

Submitted jointly by ILGA-Europe, AIRE Centre, ICJ and UKLGIG.

Find here the communicated case.

Every November 20, on Trans Day of Remembrance (TDoR), we remember those whose lives have been taken away through transphobic violence. This year’s Trans Murder Monitoring report from Transgender Europe shows the highest number of annual killings since the report was first published 12 years ago.

Trans Day of Remembrance was founded in 1999 and it is the day when we remember trans and gender-diverse people whose lives have been cut short. According to Trans Murder Monitoring by Transgender Europe (TGEU), 350 people have been killed since November 2019, a rise of 6% since last year’s 331. Furthermore, the report shows an alarming and deeply worrying gradual increase per year between 2008 and 2020.

Because the number of unreported cases is unknown, this is only part of the story. What we know is that, globally, almost all the victims were trans women or trans feminine people. Over six in ten were sex workers, 38% of the murders took place on the street, and 22% were killed their own homes. In Europe, half of the victims were migrants.

People, not numbers

This is not just data and figures; these are real, vital, living people who had their lives taken away, people who like you had hopes and dreams, friends, family and people who cared for them. People like Valera, a housekeeper beaten to death in Chelyabinsk, Russia. Or Jessyca Sarmiento, a 38 year-old sex worker who was deliberately run-over by a car in Paris, France. Or 26 year-old Essi Granlund, stabbed to death in a killing that was described by the police as “an argument between two men.”

According to the report, 11 trans people were killed in Europe. You can find out who these people were here.

“Trans women often feel the disgust and misogyny of society, especially when we first transition,” Dinah de Riquet Bons and Sabrina Sanchez, board members of the International Committee on the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe (ICRSE), wrote for ILGA-Europe’s blog last year. “Our bodies and behaviour dismantle binarism, rejecting the patriarchal privilege given to those bodies born with a penis. Embracing femininity makes us disposable; it sends us to the lowest rung on the societal ladder. We lose status, family, friends, communities, work, and possibilities to study. The most affected are those of us who have to struggle with intersectional racist discrimination because of our ethnic diversity.”

Exacerbated circumstances

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted us all, but especially those who were already vulnerable, and sex workers in particular. Growing racism and police brutality are also putting trans lives at greater risk, especially those of black and migrant women of colour, sex workers, young people and the economically disadvantaged. Our Rainbow Europe Map 2020 showed that only 16 countries in Europe and Central Asia have implemented hate crime law that expressly includes gender identity as an aggravating factor. This year, North Macedonia was the only country to extend protection from hate crime, after amending its Criminal Code to add sexual orientation and gender identity grounds.

3664 trans and gender-diverse people have been murdered worldwide between 2008 and 2020. We cannot lower that number but we can certainly do more to prevent it from increasing in the future. It begins with understanding that all lives are equally valuable, and that many trans lives are vulnerable. It begins with education. It begins with our societies taking responsibility for the protection and valuing of all lives, including the lives of vulnerable trans people.

ILGA-Europe’s Annual Review identifies a sharp rise in anti-LGBTI hate-speech across the European region, often carried out by public figures. To mark European Day for Victims of Crime (February 22), we report on the ways in which such rhetoric is in turn violently affecting the lives LGBTI people.

Throughout 2019, there was sharp increase in physical attacks on LGBTI people across the European region, many of the latter premeditated and brutal. There was also an increase in attacks on LGBTI centres and gatherings. This isn’t only in countries where official hate-speech is on the rise, like Poland, Romania or Spain. An increase of hate crimes against LGBTI people is a pan-European phenomenon we have identified in our Annual Review 2020, which analyses trends and developments in the human rights situation of LGBTI people across 54 countries.

Brexit, for instance, and the populist narrative surrounding it, can be linked an increase in anti-LGBTI hate crimes and incidents in England and Wales from 5,807 in 2014–15, to 13,530 in 2018–19. The banning of events in Armenia, Hungary, Poland, Russia, and Turkey, and the prosecution of participants in Pride events in the latter, add to an atmosphere lacking in a sense of safety. In the Polish city of Lublin, a couple was arrested for bringing an explosive device to the Pride march.

There has also been the growing presence of anti-LGBTI, anti-gender and neo-Nazi protesters in public spaces during events such as Pride parades and film screenings. In several cities LGBTI centres were targeted with graffiti and other such attacks.

To mark European Day for Victims of Crime (February 22), here are examples of the many hate crimes documented in 2019, across the region:

Albania

On 12 November, a homeless trans woman who participated in the Dyke March, was brutally attacked by five men. The President of Albania condemned such “cowardly acts” and asked for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.

Armenia

On 20 June, 11 LGBT activists were verbally abused by four men in a park in Yerevan. The victims called the police, who told the activists to leave the park and took the four men to the police station. The investigation is ongoing.

Azerbaijan

Hate crimes against the LGBT community continued to be a serious issue in 2019. On 1 April, at least eight gay men and trans sex workers were detained by the police in Baku, signaling a new wave of arrests of LGBTQ people. On 2 April, a gay sex worker became a victim of extortion, theft, and blackmail in Baku and the perpetrator was detained. On 28 June, five trans women were physically assaulted by a group of 15 on a beach in Mardakan, four of the attackers have been arrested. On 6 July, a trans person was attacked outside a club while waiting for a taxi. The case was not reported to the police. In September, a gay man was beaten, harassed, and expelled from his village by his family for “dishonouring” them. The man reported the violence and a rape he was victim of last year.

Belarus

On 24 August, filmmaker Nikolai Kuprich and two friends were beaten up in a homophobic attack in Minsk.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

On 2 February, a lesbian couple was verbally assaulted and threatened with a knife and three days later were physically attacked by the same man and his friends. The violence was presumed to be linked to heightened homophobia ahead of the country’s first Pride march.

Bulgaria

Examples of documented hate crime include physical assault against two lesbians in January and February, and two gay men in Plovdid and in Varna. Five attacks were carried out against the LGBTI community centre, Rainbow Hub in the spring.

Cyprus

In February, a gay man was attacked in Nicosia. Despite multiple witnesses, the police failed to establish it was a hate crime. Another gay man was attacked by three men in a cruising area in Nicosia on 24 June. The case was reported to the police, who failed to take action.

Georgia

In June, renowned homophobe and public figure Levan Vasadze announced that self-organised groups, equipped with wooden clubs, would patrol Tbilisi to prevent Pride events. The Ministry of Interior stated that calling for the creation of such groups is illegal. However, no legal action was taken.

Greece

On 11 March, the building housing the Checkpoint Prevention and Examination Centers was targeted by a homophobic arson attack. The Checkpoints provide free HIV testing to vulnerable groups. On 2 September, two gay men were verbally harassed and physically assaulted by police officers.

Hungary

In March, Mi Hazánk live-streamed the disruption of a discussion on LGBTQI Roma people in Szeged. A day after Budapest Pride Festival opened extremists posted “Stop the Fag Propaganda” stickers outside the Auróra community space, Budapest Pride’s headquarters. Similar attacks were carried out in June, September and October. A participant of this year’s Budapest Pride March was spat on and kicked in the stomach after the event. In August, a girl was beaten up in Bénye for carrying a rainbow bag.

Iceland

In June, Candice Aþena was on her way home in Reykjavík when the men approached her, and after realising she was trans, kicked her in the face. This is not the first time Candice has been harassed.

Italy

Numerous hate crimes against LGBT people were documented in 2019, including two murders in May and June.

Luxembourg

Jean-Baptiste Pouthas, a French gay man was attacked in the Gare district of Luxembourg after a Pride party in July. Despite calling out for help, none of the passerby came to his rescue.

Montenegro

On 28 August, a trans man was attacked in Kolašin. The attackers went to the man’s house and when he answered the door, beat, insulted and humiliated him until he lost consciousness. The case was reported and police have arrested three suspects.

Portugal

In February, a lesbian couple was verbally and physically assaulted in Costa da Caparica. The couple called the police, who failed to show up. In July, a young trans man was targeted by physical and verbal violence in Coimbra, twice within a few days. The attack was reported to the police. In September, a gay couple was verbally and physically assaulted in downtown Lisbon. The police were nearby and identified the perpetrators, but let them go.

Romania

Two trans women were sexually and verbally harassed, and later physically assaulted on 8 June in Sibiu. The women were approached by a man in a club, who later physically assaulted them in a second club. No one intervened to defend the women, while they were being beaten. They fought back and reported the violence. The case is currently pending, the victims have not heard back from the police

Russia

Hate crimes against LGBTI people, including murder, physical violence and extortion were committed again this year. The authorities failed to classify them as anti-LGBTI hate crimes. In February, a court in Tatarstan sentenced a man to one year in prison for physically attacking a teenager who he thought was gay.

Serbia

Belgrade’s Pride Information Centre was attacked four times since December 2018. Although the police were informed of the possibility of one of the attacks in October, they did nothing to prevent it. On 24 June, a lesbian couple was harassed at the Engineering Students’ Club (KST). The security staff refused to protect them, saying they were to blame and should not have kissed.

Slovenia

On the morning of 1 November, one of Slovenia’s few LGBTI spaces, Tiffany Club in Ljubljana, was violently attacked by a group. In October, a gay man was beaten up in Murska Sobota.

Spain

A trans sex worker was brutally murdered by a client in Avilés on 21 September. Gay men were verbally harassed, threatened and assulted in Barcelona, Tenerife, and Valencia. On 19 December, politician Ángel Vázquez suffered a homophobic attack in Burjassot.

Switzerland

An increasing number of violent incidents, primarily against gay men, were reported this year, including an attack against an information stand at IDAHOT, May 17, and a gay couple being attacked on their way home from Pride in June. Both cases happened in Zurich.

Turkey

Several trans woman were victims of murder this year. Hande ?eker was murdered by a police officer in Izmir on 9 January; Gokce Saygi was killed in her home in Antalya in May; Defne was killed in her house in Afyonkarahisar in June. Court cases are ongoing. A group of trans women were attacked in a park in Antep in June and were then detained and verbally abused by police officers.

United Kingdom

On 30 May, a female couple was attacked by a group of men in London. The case went viral after the victims posted a picture of their injuries. London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, and then Prime Minister Theresa May condemned the attack.

While this week Switzerland made hate speech illegal against people based on their sexual orientation, in 2019 one of the trends observed in ILGA-Europe’s Annual Review is a sharp rise in on-and-offline anti-LGBTI hate speech, often from political leaders, across Europe. As our Executive Director, Evelyne Paradis, recently shared at the Google Online Safety Summit, “LGBTI communities need to know that perpetrators of violent speech will be held responsible”.

Our current Annual Review, which was launched at the European Parliament on February 4, identifies trends and developments in the human rights situation of LGBTI people across Europe. One of these trends is a sharp rise in hate speech across the region, often carried out by public figures. One of the cases which received the most media attention was in Poland, where anti-LGBTI rhetoric by the governing Law and Justice (PiS) Party resulted in more than 80 municipal or local governments proclaiming themselves to be “free from LGBTI ideology”.

However, while much of the public and political attention was focused on Poland, ILGA-Europe’s Annual Review 2020 identifies growing official hate speech from political and religious leaders in other countries, where anti-LGBTI rhetoric was propagated with impunity. In most Central Asian countries, including some where LGBT people continue to be criminalised, there are reports of official hate-speech. Here is what we found:

Albania

In October, MP Kujtim Gjuzi (Conservative Party) publicly threatened LGBT people on a prime time political show on RTV Ora. The host also made negative statements. Both cases were reported to the Council of Complaints at the Albanian Media Authority, which issued a warning, but did not impose a fine on the channel.

Andorra

In August, Naira Nahapetyan, a member of Yerevan’s Municipal Council boasted online about attacking LGBTI people. Comments on the post incited violence against LGBTI people.

Azerbaijan

In February, Aynur Sofiyeva, Deputy Chairperson of the State Committee for Family, Women and Children Affairs, made homophobic remarks at an event, criticising the West for trying to impose same-sex marriage on others.

Belarus

In July, Dmitry Tsayun, official of the Ministry of Interior, said that LGBT equals pedophilia in an article published on sexual violence against children. The project, whose platform published the article, was supported by UNICEF Belarus. Local civil society urged UNICEF to promptly remove the article, which they did. It is however still available on the Ministry’s website.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Following the news that the country’s first Pride would be held in September, hate speech became more common, mainly on social media. For instance, MP Samra ?osovi? Hajdarei? publicly called for the isolation and expulsion of LGBT people from society, and particularly children.

Bulgaria

Candidates for local elections in Sofia from ultra-nationalist parties, Dzhambazki (VMRO-BND), Volen Siderov (Ataka), and Nikolay Drenchev (Vazrajdane), promised to ban Sofia Pride if elected.

Cyprus

In August, following international public outcry, the Attorney General called for an investigation of the Bishop of Morfou’s statements, that gay men give off a “particular odour” and can be identified by “holy men”. The police dropped the case, finding no element of hate speech.

Czech Republic

A spokesman of the Czech President, Ji?í Ov?á?ek, stated that “the ideologies of ‘climatism’, LGBT or ‘genderism’ are totalitarian”. Chairman of the Senate, Mr. Kubera, made similar statements. AntiLGBTI sentiments are one of the key drivers of the new ultra conservative party Trikolora, founded this year.

Finland

Prior to Helsinki Pride in June, Christian Democratic politician Päivi Räsänen published an open letter criticising the Church for participating in the Pride. Evangelical Lutheran archbishop Tapio Luoma responded by affirming that same-sex couples are warmly welcome at Church events. Following Räsänen’s letter, a few hundred people formally left the Church.

Georgia

In February, an MP of the “Georgian Patriots” tabled an initiative to eradicate the terms sexual orientation and gender identity from 14 laws. The initiative was not adopted.

Greece

In January, Panos Kammenos, Minister of National Defense was sued by the Greek Helsinki Monitor for his homophobic hate speech against MP Georgios Amyras from the centrist party, To Potami. Kammenos’s remarks were both homophobic and sexist. No official apology followed.

Hungary

On 15 May, Speaker of the Parliament and former President László Kövér (Fidesz) stated that “morally there is no difference between the behaviour of a paedophile and the behaviour of someone who demands” same-sex marriage and adoption sparking outrage.

Kosovo

In February, the Prosecution initiated (ex-officio) a case against an official in the Ministry of Justice for hate speech against LGBTI people. In a comment on social media the official wrote that homosexuals and LGBTI people should be beheaded. The police took him into custody and held him for 48 hours. LGBTI organisations were unable to get further information regarding the case.

Portugal

In March, Porto’s Court of Appeal judge Neto de Moura condemned same-sex marriage and adoption by same-sex couples. Previously, the Judge passed victim-blaming judgments in domestic violence cases and is now banned from taking such cases.

Slovakia

During the presidential elections in March, several parties used homophobic hate speech in their campaigns. Civil society called on politicians to abstain from hate speech against the community.

Spain

Following the far-right Vox’s debut in the Senate, in February the party vetoed a motion to tackle homophobia in sports. In its election campaigns in May, Vox vowed to ban Pride marches and compared homosexuality to “bestiality”. In the November elections, Vox came in as the third strongest party.

Turkey

The Minister of Internal Affairs, Süleyman Soylu made several anti-LGBTI statements along 2019. In May, LGBTI+ people were targeted by hate speech at a symposium organised by Turkish National Human Rights Institution (T?HEK). On 5 July, the Friday khutbah of Presidency of Religious Affairs read in all mosques, included anti-LGBTI statements.

Commenting on the rise of official anti-LGBTI hate speech, our Executive Director, Evelyne Paradis said: “The governments of some countries are overtly turning the tide on LGBTI and other minority rights, seeking to replace democracy and diversity with ‘traditional values’. Their voices may be loud, but we know that most EU member states want to see continual progress towards equality for LGBTI people in Europe and beyond.

“The rights and freedom of the LGBTI community are not separate from the rights and freedom of all who live in Europe and Central Asia, and the erosion of those rights is a marker for the erosion of all fundamental human rights.”

Today, the European Court of Human Rights found Lithuania’s failure to investigate online hateful comments against a gay couple to violate their rights to private and family life as well as being discriminatory on the ground of sexual orientation.

The landmark case of Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania originated after one of the applicants posted a photograph of him kissing his male partner on his Facebook page, which led to hundreds of online hate comments. Some were about LGBT people in general, while others personally threatened the couple. The applicants alleged that they had been discriminated on the ground of sexual orientation, on account of the public authorities’ refusal to launch a pre-trial investigation into hateful comments left on the first applicant’s Facebook page. They also argued that the Lithuanian authorities’ refusal to launch a pre-trial investigation had left them without the possibility of legal redress.

In a unanimous judgment, the Court found violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights, taken in conjunction with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).

The Court reiterated the authorities’ positive obligation under Article 8 to effectively investigate whether the comments regarding the applicants’ sexual orientation constituted incitement to hatred and violence. The Court considered that the failure to discharge such obligation was due to the “discriminatory state of mind” of the authorities. Accordingly, the Court held that it constituted violation of Article 14, taken in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention.

The Court found that the statistics provided inter alia by the third-party interveners and ECRI’s report demonstrated a clear lack of willingness by the Lithuanian authorities to prosecute perpetrators. The applicants had been denied an effective domestic remedy in breach of Article 13 of the Convention.

Importantly the Court reaffirmed the right of individuals to openly identify themselves as gay, lesbian or any other sexual minority and the growing general tendency to view relationships between same-sex couples as falling within the concept of “family life”.

The Court’s judgment was informed by a third party intervention submitted jointly by the AIRE Centre (Advice on individual rights in Europe), ILGA-Europe, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the Human Rights Monitoring Institute (HRMI).

“Today’s judgment is ever more important in establishing State’s positive obligations in tackling hate speech against LGBTI people in Lithuania and across Council of Europe member States amidst the rise in hate in a number of countries,” said Arpi Avetisyan, Senior Litigation Officer, ILGA-Europe.

“The Court was clear that such ‘undisguised calls on attack’ on the persons’ physical and mental integrity require protection by the criminal law and public authorities must apply the law without discrimination. We hope this judgment will be implemented duly and promptly ensuring equality and safety for the LGBTI community in Lithuania.”

Robert Wintemute, Professor of Human Rights Law at King’s College London (UK) and co-representative of the applicants, said:  “I am very pleased that the European Court of Human Rights has sent such a strong message to national authorities across Europe that they must take anti-LGBTI hate speech seriously, and investigate complaints, even about a single hateful comment on Facebook, let alone one that LGBTI persons should be killed. .”

Tomas Vytautas Raskevi?ius, Member of the Vilnius City Council (Lithuania) and co-representative of the applicants, said:  “The European Court of Human Rights has concluded today that the Lithuanian authorities systematically fail in effectivelly responding to homophobic hate speech online. I am positive that this judgment will become a powerful entry point to start conversation with Lithuanian police, prosecutors and judges about the measures that we must take in order to encourage reporting and effectivelly tackle anti-LGBT crimes..“

According to Vladimir Simonko, Executive Director of Lithuanian Gay League (LGL), this case raises questions of considerable public importance about the nature and scope of the positive obligation of Member States under the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) to protect individuals from homophobic hate speech and incitement to violence.

“It is appalling that the Lithuanian Government were challenging the very fact that a civil-society organisation might also have a legitimate interest in the outcome of the applicants’ case, and thus questioning the fundamental role of non-governmental organisations in performing a “public watchdog” function in a pluralist, democratic society,” said Simonko. 

According to Livio Zilli, Senior Legal Adviser & UN Representative  with the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ): “Among other things, the ICJ welcomes the Court’s finding in its judgment today that, as a result of their discriminatory attitudes towards the applicants’ sexual orientation, the authorities had denied them an effective domestic remedy in connection with their complaints about a breach of the right to private life under the Convention.”

---

• ILGA-Europe’s joint intervention with partners is here.
• Find out more about ILGA-Europe’s strategic litigation work.

Asylum/ arbitrary refoulement

(Application no. 889/19), 18 December 2019

Find here the communicated case.

Find here the judgement.

Find here our press statement regarding the judgement.

• The applicant is a national of Gambia. He is in registered same-sex partnership with a Swiss national. The applicant complains about the refusal of a residence permit and his impending expulsion to Gambia where he would face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
• ILGA-Europe together with the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)  submitted the following:
  • Criminalization of consensual same-sex sexual conduct is incompatible with international human rights standards and is discriminatory. Besides, the absence of data on the implementation of criminal law may in itself be evidence of oppression and threats suffered by LGBTI persons.
  • Concealment constitutes evidence of the objective well-foundedness of a subjective fear of persecution. Requiring coerced concealment of someone’s same-sex sexual orientation – as a way, purportedly, to mitigate the real risk of their being exposed to Article 3 prohibited treatment – constitutes pain and suffering amounting to proscribed treatment under Article 3 even if temporary. Mental harm resulting from fear of exposure to physical harm has been found by the ECtHR to constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. According to refugee law, in some cases psychological harm is persecutory.
  • Enforcing removals on the basis that the individuals concerned would be expected to conceal their sexual orientation would constitute arbitrary refoulement and thus violate Article 3 ECHR.
  • In Gambia, consensual same-sex sexual activity can give rise to a number of very serious criminal offences, with penalties ranging from seven years to imprisonment for life. In turn, the criminalization of consensual same-sex sexual relations fosters a climate of state-sanctioned homophobia, resulting in abuse, discrimination and violence by state and non-state actors. The mere existence of laws that criminalize consensual same-sex sexual conduct enables, encourages and contributes to the persecutory environment that exists in Gambia and exposes LGBT individuals to real risks of persecutory harm.

A resolution adopted by the European Parliament today makes a strong call for an EU LGBTI strategy to counter the rise of official hate-speech and its consequences across the European Union.

The European Parliament’s resolution on public discrimination and anti-LGBT hate speech, adopted in Strasbourg today, identifies a broad trend across Europe and its consequences in society, amid deeply worrying situations in several countries. 

The resolution wraps up the debate on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people that was held in plenary in Strasbourg on 26 November.

During that debate, MEPs voiced their concern regarding ‘‘LGBTI-free zones” in Poland. Ahead of parliamentary elections in the country this autumn, dozens of municipalities, countries and provinces in the south-eastern part of the country declared themselves “free of LGBTI ideology”. By now, 86 “LGBTI-free zones” have been declared. 

The resolution calls on Poland to firmly condemn discrimination against LGBTI people and to revoke resolutions attacking LGBTI rights, including local bills against “LGBT ideology”, in accordance with its national law; as well as its obligations under EU and international law.

In Poland, Kuba Gawron, co-author of research on LGBT-free zones and Atlas of Hate, called the resolution “a strong expression of support for the LGBTI community in Poland, which is under attack.”

“We call on the Polish Government to repeal all anti-LGBTI resolutions in accordance to national law,” he said. “Such resolutions are a threat to LGBTI-community and create an atmosphere of consent for violence. We also call to the European Commission to verify Polish compliance with the anti-discrimination provisions in the contracts for EU-funded projects. We believe that these provisions may be broken, especially in the education sector.”

In a broader context, the resolution expresses deep concern at the growing number of attacks against the LGBTI community coming from the State officials and politicians at the national, regional and local levels. It recognises that such attacks have seen a rise in violence against LGBTI people, with hate crimes motivated by homophobia and transphobia on the rise across in the EU, while responses from authorities too often remain inadequate.

The resolution reiterates a call on the Commission to adopt an EU LGBTI strategy and a comprehensive, permanent and objective EU mechanism on democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights that includes the protection of LGBTI rights. It calls for the adoption of legislation and policies in several different areas, including freedom of movement, hate-speech and crime, education, and sports, to ensure the equal human rights of LGBTI people.

Advocacy Director of ILGA-Europe, Katrin Hugendubel, said: “We very much welcome that the European Parliament with this resolution condemns these developments and speaks out clearly in solidarity with the LGBTI communities across Europe,with a call for an EU LGBT strategy.

“According to the German ministry of interior, the number of homophobic hate crimes in the first six months of 2019 were already more than in the whole of 2013. In the latter part of this year, our members reported attacks on community events or their offices in Belgrade, Ljubljana, Budapest, Vienna and Lublinwhere explosive devices were taken to the Equality March, presumably intended to cause grievous bodily harm or death.

“Europe is at a dangerous crossroads. Certain groups and organisations are overtly turning the tide on LGBTI and other minority rights, seeking to replace democracy and diversity with ‘traditional values’. In this context of rising hate and attacks on LGBTI rights, it is more important than ever to reconfirm and strengthen the commitment from the EU institutions to work on protecting LGBTI rights.”

• The resolution received 463 votes in favour, 107 against and 105 abstentions.
• Read here the resolution adopted in PDF.
• Watch November 26 the debate here 
• See Kuba Gawron’s Atlas of Hate – an online map that shows “LGBT-Free Zones” in Poland.