LGBT Human Rights Issues Around the World; A Legal Perspective 2015 Houston Midyear Meeting Free CLE Program

Friday, February 6, 2015 ● 1:30 pm—3:00 pm ● George R. Brown Convention Center, Room 342 B/E (Level 3) Sponsored by: Commission of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Co-sponsored by: Section of International Law

Moderator: Lelia Mooney, LL.M. Diversity Officer, ABA Section of International Law Panel Speakers: Judge Phyllis Frye Attorney at Law Houston, TX Ashley Kaper Managing Attorney Human Rights First Houston, TX Professor Mark E. Wojcik The John Marshall Law School Chicago, IL

Join our lineup of International LGBT legal experts as they provide an overview and discussion on the current states of International LGBT rights issues! This program will consider advances and set-backs to marriage equality and human rights in countries around the world. Speakers will discuss anti-gay laws that have been enacted around the globe including the anti-gay propaganda laws in Russia, the anti-sodomy laws in India, the harsh imprisonment laws in Nigeria, and the atrocities taking place in Egypt. The program will discuss the mixture of advances and set-backs in the framework of international human rights and will also consider how and whether activities by associations outside the adversely-affected nations can help the situation of LGBT persons in those countries. The ABA directly applies for and ordinarily receives CLE credit for ABA programs in AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, GA, GU, HI, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MN, MS, MO, MT, NH, NM, NV, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WI, and WV. These states sometimes do not approve a program for credit before the program occurs. This course is expected to qualify for 1.5 CLE credit hours in 60-minute states, and 1.8 credit hours in 50-minute states. This transitional program is approved for both newly admitted and experienced attorneys in NY. Attorneys may be eligible to receive CLE credit through reciprocity or attorney self-submission in other states. For more information about CLE accreditation in your state : http://www.americanbar.org/publications

Table of Contents

 


Speaker Bios....................................................................................................................................3

A Global Snapshot ofMarriage........................................................................................................7

Update on Non-Discrimination......................................................................................................15

How to Stop Russia From Exporting Homophobia.......................................................................17

History of the International Conference on Transgender Law and Employment Policy, Inc........34

International Bill of Gender Rights................................................................................................44

ABA International Law Newsletter...............................................................................................51

ATTORNEYS: PHYLLIS RANDOLPH FRYE * SALVADOR J. BENAVIDEZ * ANGELA OAKS* ROBERT STEED* TRACIE J. JACKSON-OF COUNSEL * PARTNERS

Phyllis Randolph Frye is an Eagle Scout, a former member of the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets, a US Army veteran (1LT-RA 1970-72), a licensed engineer, a licensed attorney, a father, a grandmother and a lesbian wife. She is the first, out, transgender judge in the nation. Now having lived almost sixty percent of her life as the woman she always felt herself to be, Phyllis remains on the cutting edge of LGBTI and especially transgender legal and political issues. When the “gay” community was still ignoring or marginalizing the transgender community in the early 1990’s, Phyllis began the national transgender legal and political movement (thus she is known as being the TG movement’s “Grandmother”) with the six annual transgender law conferences (ICTLEP) and their grassroots training. Attorney Frye is one of the Task Force’s 1995 “Creator of Change” award winners. In 1999 she was given the International Foundation for Gender Education’s “Virginia Prince Lifetime Achievement” award. In 2001 she was given the National LGBT Bar Association’s (a.k.a. Lavender Law’s) highest honor, the “Dan Bradley Award.” She was honored beginning in 2009 by Texas A&M University with an annual “Advocacy Award” given in her name. In 2013 the Houston Transgender Unity Committee gave her its “Lifetime Achievement Award.” In 2010 Phyllis was sworn-in as the first, out, transgender judge in the nation, as a City of Houston Associate Municipal Judge. She retains her senior partnership with Frye, Oaks and Benavidez, PLLC, (at www.liberatinglaw.com) which is an out LGBTIand-straight-allies law firm. While the members of the firm practice law in a variety of areas, Phyllis devotes her practice exclusively to taking transgender clients -- both adults and minors -- through the Texas courts to change the clients’ names and genders on their legal documents. 3315 Mercer Street, Houston, TX 77027 Tel: 713-227-1717 Fax: 713-522-2610 Web: www.LiberatingLaw.com

Ashley Kaper Managing Attorney, Refugee Representation, Human Rights First Ashley Kaper is the Managing Attorney with the Refugee Representation program in the Houston, Texas office where she oversees the pro bono legal representation of indigent asylum seekers. She provides support to volunteer lawyers from law firms in the Houston area who represent asylum seekers at all levels of the system. Prior to joining Human Rights First Ashley was an immigration attorney at the Bronx Defenders, where she advised noncitizens on the immigration consequences of contact with the criminal justice system and represented clients with affirmative applications and those seeking relief in immigration court. She has also worked along the Arizona/Mexico border, training detained noncitizens on how to represent themselves in removal proceedings. Ashley has a bachelor’s degree from Barnard College and received her J.D. from the University of Arizona School of Law. She is admitted to the New York bar.

Mark E. Wojcik is a Professor of Law at The John Marshall Law School in Chicago, where he teaches courses in International Law, International Litigation, Sexual Orientation Law, and Legal Writing. He also teaches as an adjunct professor at law schools in Mexico, Switzerland, and Lithuania. He was the founder of the LGBT Rights Committee of the Chicago Bar Association; he served on the Illinois State Bar Association Standing Committee on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues, and he was a Commissioner on the ABA Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Commission. He is a Past President of the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago and served on the Board of the National LGBT Bar Association. He also chaired the Section on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues for the Association of American Law Schools. His scholarship includes articles on same-sex marriage, sexual orientation discrimination, and the first law school casebook on the legal issues of HIV and AIDS. In 2010, Professor Wojcik was inducted into the City of Chicago Gay and Lesbian Hall of Fame, the only municipally-recognized Hall of Fame in the United States for LBGT persons. In August 2014, he was finally able to marry his partner of 20 years.

Lelia Mooney, Director, Latin America and the Caribbean Partners for Democratic Change

Ms. Mooney oversees Partners' programs in Latin America and the Caribbean, and works on the development of new cross-regional and multi stakeholder initiatives. She has over twenty years of experience designing, managing and evaluating complex governance, rule of law, gender and social inclusion, conflict management and transformation, extractive governance, multi-stakeholder engagement and local capacity development projects in Latin America, as well as in Africa and Asia. She has successfully led multi-disciplinary and multi-cultural teams in development, conflict and post-conflict contexts and facilitated local capacity development projects with government institutions, civil society organizations, academic institutions and the private sector that achieved sustainability. Prior to joining Partners, Ms. Mooney was the co-founder and Senior Director of the USAID funded Inter-American Democracy Network, with Asociacion Conciencia in Argentina, served as the Chief of Mission of the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES) Governance project in Paraguay and was a Rule of Law, Gender and Capacity Building Specialist of the USAID funded Women’s Legal Rights Initiative, with Partners of the Americas in Washington, D.C.. She has been a consultant to the World Bank, the United States Institute of Peace Rule of Law Center (USIP), a number of USAID funded projects, and other private initiatives. She holds leadership roles in the American Bar Association Section of International Law (ABASIL) where she previously served as the Rule of Law Officer and currently is the Diversity Officer. She is also a member of the American Bar Association (ABA) Task Force on Sustainability. Ms. Mooney is the editor of “Promoting the Rule of Law: A Practitioner’s Guide to Key Issues and Development,” released by ABA Publishing. Ms. Mooney is a trained attorney from Argentina. She holds an LL.M. in Law in Development Studies from the University of Warwick Law School from the United Kingdom and an LL.M. from the Georgetown University Law Center in the US. She is a former International Research Fellow at the Kettering Foundation and a Fellow of the Global Salzburg Seminar. She speaks native Spanish, fluent English with an intermediate command of Portuguese and French.

A Global Snapshot of Same-Sex Marriage: February 3, 2015 Mark E. Wojcik* Since the same-sex marriages in the Netherlands in 2001 and Belgium in 2003 and the first same-sex marriages in parts of Canada and the United States, 1 the number of jurisdictions throughout the world that recognize same-sex marriage is constantly expanding. Here is a “global snapshot” of same-sex marriage in the United States and around the world as of February 3, 2015. Unless otherwise noted, most of the information here is adapted from the authoritative list maintained by journalist Rex Wockner, Where is Same-Sex Legal?, a website that regularly updates the status of same-sex marriage 2 and from the rich collection of resources on the Freedom to Marry website. 3 In January 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in four cases consolidated from the Sixth Circuit, which upheld same-sex marriage bans and created a split among the federal circuit courts. Further information on those cases can be found below in the section on the United States.

Worldwide: 18 and Soon 19 Countries The following 18 countries now recognize same sex marriage on a nationwide basis: 1. The Netherlands (2001), 2. Belgium (2003), 3. Canada (2005), 4. Spain (2005), 5. South Africa (2006), 6. Norway (2009), 7. Sweden (2009), 8. Argentina (2010), 9. Iceland (2010), 10. Portugal (2010), 11. Denmark (2012), 12. France (2013), 13. Brazil (2013), Professor of Law, The John Marshall Law School—Chicago. See Mark E. Wojcik, The Wedding Bells Heard Around the World: Years from Now, Will We Wonder Why We Worried About Same-Sex Marriage?, 24 N.I.U. L. Rev. 589 (2004), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1143144. 2 http://wockner.blogspot.com/ (last visited Feb. 4, 2015). 3 http://www.freedomtomarry.org/ (last visited Feb. 4, 2015). *

1

1

14. Uruguay (2013), 15. New Zealand (2013), 16. England and Wales (2014), 17. Scotland (2014), and 18. Luxembourg (2015). Finland is expected shortly to join that list following parliament’s approval in December 2014 of a voter initiative for same-sex marriage. 4 And Mexico allows same-sex marriage is only some states but requires recognition of those marriages in all Mexican states. 5 In addition to the countries listed above, same-sex marriages also have taken place on the Caribbean islands of Saba, a municipality of the Netherlands (2012), and Martinique, an overseas region of France (2013).

NATIONAL JURISDICTIONS Australia Same-sex couples were able to marry in the Australian Capital Territory for five days in early December 2013 under a special "same-sex marriage" law the territory enacted. On Dec. 12, 2013, however, Australia's High Court invalidated the law and the marriages, because marriage in Australia (unlike the United States) is a matter of federal law rather than something to be left up to the Australian states and territories.

Colombia Since September 2013, some same-sex couples have been able to marry in Colombia, but the state of the law there is still uncertain.

Finland 6 Legal recognition for same-sex couples in Finland was available since 2002 as registered partnerships that ostensibly gave the same rights and responsibilities as marriage for opposite-sex couples except for adoption rights and the right to say that you were married. In 2009, the Parliament revised the law allowing couples to adopt the biological children of their partner. After the parliament rejected sameSee section below for “Finland.” See section below for “Mexico.” 6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Finland (last visited February 4, 2015). 4 5

2

sex marriage legislation in 2012, the issue was reintroduced to the Parliament in December 2013 as a citizens' initiative, with the support of 160,000 people. Although the Legal Affairs Committee recommended rejection of the proposal, the full Parliament voted in November 2014 to reject that recommendation. The citizen’s initiative was finally approved by the full session of Parliament at the second reading on December 12, 2014. The new Finish marriage law will enter into effect when other laws are changed to account for the new same-sex marriage law.

Mexico In Mexico, same-sex marriage is available in the Federal District (Mexico City) and the states of Coahuila and Quintana Roo -- and, for some couples who filed legal cases, in the states of Baja California, Chihuahua, Colima, Guanajuato, Jalisco, Oaxaca, Querétaro and Yucatán, among others. Under a decision from the Mexico Supreme Court, a lawful same-sex marriage performed in one Mexican state must be recognized by each of the other states. Mexico has 31 states.

United States: U.S. Supreme Court As of February 3, 2015, same-sex marriage is legal in 37 states and the District of Columbia. Additionally, Alabama is expected to have same-sex marriage by February 9, 2015. Furthermore, following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in United States v. Windsor, 7 the federal government recognizes same-sex marriages even in those U.S. states that do not yet allow or recognize same-sex marriage, so long as the same-sex couple was married in a U.S. or foreign jurisdiction that recognized same-sex marriage. This means that throughout the United States, married same-sex couples can enjoy many federal benefits including immigration, military benefits, and federal income tax on a married basis. On January 16, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in cases from four states whose bans had been upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit -- Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. 8 The Supreme Court framed the two issues it will hear: (1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? (90 minutes allotted for oral argument) (2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was

570 U.S. 12 (2013). http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011615zr_f2q3.pdf (Jan. 16, 2015) 7 8

3

lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state? (60 minutes allotted for oral argument). The briefs of petitioners are to be filed on or before 2 p.m., Friday, February 27, 2015. The briefs of respondents are to be filed on or before 2 p.m., Friday, March 27, 2015. The reply briefs are to be filed on or before 2 p.m., Friday, April 17, 2015. Assuming that oral arguments are scheduled this Term, the decision would be expected by the end of June (just in time for all of the Gay Pride Parades celebrating the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots).

United States: States that Recognize Marriage As of February 3, 2015, the 37 U.S. states (and the District of Columbia) that have same-sex marriage on a statewide basis are: 1. Massachusetts (2004), 2. California (2008 for four months until the passage of Proposition 8, and then in 2013 for good after Proposition 8 was declared unconstitutional), 3. Connecticut (2008), 4. Vermont (2009), 5. Iowa (2009), 6. New Hampshire (2010), 7. Washington, D.C. (2010), 8. New York (2011), 9. Maine (2012), 10. Maryland (2012), 11. Washington (2012), 12. Delaware (2013), 13. Rhode Island (2013), 14. Minnesota (2013), 15. New Jersey (2013), 16. Hawai’i (2013), 17. New Mexico (2013), 18. Oregon (2014), 19. Pennsylvania (2014), 20. Illinois (2014), 21. Colorado (2014), 22. Indiana (2014), 23. Oklahoma (2014), 24. Utah (2014), 25. Virginia (2014), 26. Wisconsin (2014), 27. West Virginia (2014), 28. Nevada (2014), 29. North Carolina (2014),

4

30. Idaho (2014), 31. Arizona (2014), 32. Alaska (2014), 33. Wyoming (2014), 34. Kansas (2014), 35. Montana (2014), 36. South Carolina (2014) 37. Florida (Jan. 6, 2015). And the District of Columbia (2010).

United States: States that Do Not Yet Recognize Marriage Alabama After the U.S. Court of Appeals refused to extend the stay of a ruling that recognized same-sex marriage, the state of Alabama is expected to have same-sex marriage by Monday, February 9, 2015. State officials have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a stay before Monday, 9 but in January the U.S. Supreme Court refused to issue a virtually identical request for a stay from Florida. Arkansas State and federal courts have struck the same-sex marriage ban in Arkansas. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit consolidated the appeal with cases from Missouri and South Dakota and ordered oral argument in Omaha in May. Georgia The same-sex marriage ban in Georgia has been challenged in federal district court, but because of an unusual move by the district-court judge, the case may skip the district court and go straight to the Eleventh Circuit for joint consideration with appeals from Alabama and Florida. Kansas 10 (“There’s No Place Like Home”) Following a preliminary injunction issued by the federal district court, 59 of Kansas’ 105 counties are issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, representing 2.4 million of Kansas’ 2.9 million residents. Same-sex couples who live in counties that are not yet issuing licenses can go to another county to order one, See, e.g., http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/02/alabama-seeks-same-sexmarriage-delay/ (visited Feb. 4, 2015). 10 http://eqks.org/marriage-update-january-26-2015/ 9

5

pick it up three days later, and then marry anywhere in Kansas even in counties where the clerks are not issuing licenses. The Governor and Attorney General refuse to recognize the inevitability of statewide marriage and state agencies are refusing to recognize marriages performed in Kansas or elsewhere. The Equality Kansas website includes a map of which counties are issuing marriage licenses. 11 Kentucky The Sixth Circuit upheld Kentucky’s ban on same-sex marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the case with three other decisions from the Sixth Circuit. A ruling is expected in June. Louisiana A federal district court judge upheld Louisiana’s same-sex marriage ban on September 3, 2014, 12 but three weeks later a state judge found the same-sex marriage ban to be unconstitutional. 13 The state court ruling was appealed and stayed. The federal district court ruling was appealed to both the Fifth Circuit (which heard oral argument on January 9, 2015, along with cases from Mississippi and Texas) and the U.S. Supreme Court (which denied review on January 12, 2015). 14 Observers of the oral arguments before the Fifth Circuit on January 9 predict a 2-1 ruling against the ban. Michigan The Sixth Circuit upheld Michigan’s ban on same-sex marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the case with three other decisions from the Sixth Circuit. A ruling is expected in June. Mississippi Id. http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/louisiana (visited Feb. 4, 2015) (the case is Robicheaux v. George and is consolidated with another challenge to the Louisiana marriage ban, Forum for Equality Louisiana v. Barfield). 13 Jared Keller, A State Judge Just Ruled Louisiana’s Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional, Sept. 22, 2014, available at http://mic.com/articles/99514/astate-judge-just-ruled-louisiana-s-gay-marriage-ban-unconstitutional. That state court case is Costanza and Brewer v. Caldwell. The State of Louisiana appealed the state court ruling and it is now on hold. See http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/louisiana (visited Feb. 4, 2015). 14 Richard Wolf, Supreme Court Won’t Hear Louisiana Gay Marriage Case, USA Today, Jan. 12, 2015, available at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/01/12/supreme-court-gaymarriage/21465853/ 11 12

6

The Mississippi same-sex marriage ban was struck down in federal district court and appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which heard oral arguments (also with cases from Louisiana and Texas) on January 9, 2015. Observers of the oral arguments before the Fifth Circuit on January 9 predict a 2-1 ruling against the ban. Missouri (The “Sue Me” State) On October 6, 2014, Missouri started to recognize lawful same-sex marriages performed anywhere in the world after the State Attorney General decided not to appeal a marriage-recognition ruling from a court in Kansas City, Missouri. On November 5, 2014, a state judge in St. Louis struck down Missouri's marriage ban and weddings began in the city of St. Louis and St. Louis County. And n November 7, a federal judge in Kansas City struck down the state's ban and marriages began in Jackson County, which includes Kansas City and Independence. The Eighth Circuit refused to issue a stay and has scheduled consolidated oral arguments in Omaha in May 2015 along with the Arkansas and South Dakota cases. Nebraska 15 In December 2014, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska has asked the federal district court for a preliminary injunction to recognize same-sex marriage while a legal challenge to the state same-sex marriage ban is pending. 16 A hearing on the preliminary injunction seems to be set for February 19, 2015. Rex Wockner notes on his blog that the judge hearing the case had already struck down Nebraska's marriage ban in 2005 but was reversed by the Eighth Circuit. North Dakota On January 20, 2015, a federal judge stayed proceedings in two federal cases seeking the freedom to marry in North Dakota and respect for marriages legally performed in other states, pending a decision by the United States Supreme Court. 17 Ohio The Sixth Circuit upheld Ohio’s ban on same-sex marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the case with three other decisions from the Sixth Circuit. A ruling is expected in June. http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/nebraska (visited Feb. 4, 2015) and http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/12/aclu-asks-judge-to-ordernebraska-to-recognize-same-sex-marriages/ (visited Feb. 4, 2015). 16 Waters v. Heineman, http://www.lgbtqnation.com/assets/2014/12/Nebraska-122-14.pdf 17 http://www.freedomtomarry.org/litigation/entry/north-dakota (visited Feb. 4, 2014). 15

7

South Dakota A federal district court struck down the same-sex marriage ban in South Dakota The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit consolidated the appeal with cases from Arkansas and Missouri and ordered oral argument in Omaha in May. Tennessee The Sixth Circuit upheld Tennessee’s ban on same-sex marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the case with three other decisions from the Sixth Circuit. A ruling is expected in June. Texas The Texas same-sex marriage ban was struck down in federal district court and appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which heard oral arguments (also with cases from Alabama and Louisiana) on January 9, 2015. Observers of the oral arguments before the Fifth Circuit on January 9 predict a 2-1 ruling against the ban. Other challenges are pending in Texas, including two argued to the state Supreme Court involving divorces of same-sex couples married in other states that were granted by lower courts. Those cases were argued in November of 2013 and still await rulings.

Puerto Rico The federal district court in Puerto Rico upheld the ban on same-sex marriage. The case has been appealed to the First Circuit.

Native American Tribes in the United States Nine tribes explicitly legalized same-sex marriage: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Coquille Indian Tribe in Oregon (2009), The Suquamish Tribe in Washington state (2011), The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians in Michigan (2013), The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation in Washington state (2013), The Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians in Michigan (2013), The Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel in California (2013), The Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes in Oklahoma (2013), The Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe in Minnesota (2013), and The Puyallup Tribe of Indians in Washington (2014).

8

An Update on Non-Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the United States Mark E. Wojcik There are now 17 states that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia also prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. Illinois also prohibits unlawful discrimination in financial credit services (and yes, there was a time when owners of gay bars in Chicago, for example, could not get credit from a bank). The Commonwealth of Massachusetts also prohibits sexual orientation discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodation, but Massachusetts prohibits gender identity discrimination only in employment and housing. Massachusetts somehow missed prohibiting gender identity discrimination in public accommodations. Three additional states prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation but not gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations: New Hampshire, New York, and Wisconsin. In total, there are 23 jurisdictions (including Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia) that prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations. There are 20 jurisdictions (again including Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia) that prohibit gender identity discrimination in employment and housing. And there are 19 jurisdictions that prohibit gender discrimination in public accommodations. There are 29 states that do not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, although some cities and counties in those states have enacted local ordinances prohibiting discrimination). Those 29 states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Court rulings have legalized same-sex marriage in 16 of the 29 states that do not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender

identity. This means that same-sex couples can lawfully marry in these states but they can be fired from their jobs for doing so. These states are: Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Journalist Rex Wockner has compiled a list of jurisdictions that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. That list can be found at http://wockner.blogspot.com/2015/01/lgbt-discriminationprotections-in-us.html. Mark E. Wojcik is a professor at The John Marshall Law School in Chicago.

How to Stop Russia from Exporting Homophobia BLUEPRINT FOR ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESS JANUARY 2015

Human Rights First American ideals. Universal values. On human rights, the United States must be a beacon. Activists fighting for freedom around the globe continue to look to us for inspiration and count on us for support. Upholding human rights is not only a moral obligation; it’s a vital national interest. America is strongest when our policies and actions match our values. Human Rights First is an independent advocacy and action organization that challenges America to live up to its ideals. We believe American leadership is essential in the struggle for human rights so we press the U.S. government and private companies to respect human rights and the rule of law. When they don’t, we step in to demand reform, accountability and justice. Around the world, we work where we can best harness American influence to secure core freedoms. We know that it is not enough to expose and protest injustice, so we create the political environment and policy solutions necessary to ensure consistent respect for human rights. Whether we are protecting refugees, combating torture, or defending persecuted minorities, we focus not on making a point, but on making a difference. For over 30 years, we’ve built bipartisan coalitions and teamed up with frontline activists and lawyers to tackle issues that demand American leadership. Human Rights First is a nonprofit, nonpartisan international human rights organization based in New York and Washington D.C. To maintain our independence, we accept no government funding. © 2015 Human Rights First All Rights Reserved. This report is available online at humanrightsfirst.org

WHERE TO FIND US 75 Broad Street, 31st Floor, New York, NY 10004

805 15th Street, N.W., #900 Washington, DC 20005

1303 San Jacinto Street, 9th Floor at South Texas College of Law, Houston, TX 77002

Tel: 212.845.5200 Fax: 212.845.5299

Tel: 202.547.5692 Fax: 202.543.5999

Tel: 713.955.1360 Fax: 713.955.1359

human rights first.org

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

“I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them…One of the things I think is very important for me to speak out on is making sure that people are treated fairly and justly because that’s what we stand for, and I believe that that’s a precept that’s not unique to America. That’s just something that should apply everywhere.” President Obama, August 5, 2013.

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

2

cultural tolerance for hate crimes against the

Overview

LGBT community. In practice, the law now levies administrative sanctions and fines against

RUSSIA’S BRAND OF LEGISLATIVE HOMOPHOBIA In June 2013 Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law outlawing propaganda of “nontraditional sexual relations,” thus enacting a

those found to have violated the law. Foreign citizens found in violation of the law face a harsher sentence of up to 15 days of detention and possible deportation. „

One of the representatives of the Russian

federal ban that violates the constitutionally

LGBT community to be prosecuted under

guaranteed rights of a community he is sworn to

the law, Yelena Klimova, has now been

protect. Twenty years after decriminalization of

targeted twice. In January 2014, Klimova

homosexuality, the propaganda law marks a

was charged with violating the propaganda

significant regression in terms of human rights

law for founding an online group, “Children-

for Russia and a disappointing contribution to an

404.” The aim of the group is to offer a

environment of discrimination and prejudice for

refuge to LGBT teens afraid to reveal their

the Russian lesbian, gay, bisexual, and

sexual orientation and gender identity in

transgender (LGBT) community.

public. As the group was a closed one, and therefore not disseminating information,

The law is based on regional legislation first

prosecutors eventually dropped the

implemented in Ryazan in 2006 before being

charges. Ten months later, however,

enacted into law in 11 separate regions in 2011.

Russian authorities again filed charges,

A federal law banning “homosexual

targeting Klimova for the group's presence

propaganda” was unsuccessfully pursued by

on the Russian social media network

members of the Russian Duma multiple times,

Vkontakte. Klimova fears that without

the first instance of which occurred in 2004. The

Children-404 Russian LGBT teens will have

current enacted law purportedly is designed to

nowhere to turn. The charges in the new

protect minors, but has largely been

case are pending.

implemented in a way that does not take into account whether any minors actually were

„

Numerous arrests under the law involve a

exposed to the information or whether it was

small number of individuals holding signs

pitched towards minors. A recent Constitutional

saying that being gay is normal, that there is

Court case did address this issue, finding the

no such thing as gay propaganda, or that

law constitutional provided it was actually limited

beating LGBT individuals is wrong.

to the protection of minors. As stated, the law

„

During Human Rights First's work in Russia

prohibits the portrayal of LGBT relationships as

around the Sochi Winter Olympics, four of

equal to heterosexual relationships or in a

our partnering human rights defenders were

positive light in a public manner.

detained merely hours after meeting with us

Proponents of the law have deemed the

in St. Petersburg. Ostensibly for violating

international criticism as an overreaction, citing

the propaganda law, Russian security

the low number of prosecutions under it, but the

officers took action during an attempt on the

mere existence of the law provides an air of

part of the activists to have their

legitimacy for homophobic rhetoric and a

photographs taken prior to the Opening

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

Ceremonies of the Games holding a banner

500,000 rubles, about $15,000 USD.

which read, “Any form of discrimination is

The organization continues to contest

incompatible with the Olympics.”

accusations that they are operating on behalf of foreign countries, noting that a

OTHER LEGAL TOOLS

Ministry of Justice victory in the case would further entrench the notion that

While the propaganda law is the marquee law in

the protection of the human rights of

the persecution of the Russian LGBT

LGBT persons is a foreign concept, and

community, there are several more broadly

therefore damaging to Russia's

applied laws that have come to bear on the

interests.

vulnerable group. „

3

x

Foreign Agent Law: mandates that any

LGBT film festival, was also found to be

organization engaging in “political activity”

a foreign agent and fined 500,000

while receiving aid from a foreign source

rubles. The organization had been in

must register with the Ministry of Justice as

existence since 2008.

a foreign agent. The moniker carries a debilitating stigma rooted in Cold War

In mid-2013, Side by Side, Russia’s first

„

Treason Law: expands definitions of

terminology that ostracizes organizations

treason within the country's Criminal Code

from the public. Most pointedly, the

to, in practice, criminalize engaging in

mechanics of the law create an unduly

human rights work with international

complicated registration process that makes

organizations. The law brings within the

operation for many NGOs impossible.

definition of treason the act of providing

Despite the largely administrative effects of

consultative assistance to a foreign state in

the law, authorities have detained both

a manner that could be considered as

foreign and domestic citizens under its

against the interests of Russia. Left to

guidelines. In 2014, under amendments to

interpretation, the vaguely-worded law could

the law, the Ministry of Justice was given

be applied to include work on behalf of

sweeping powers to place on the registry

human rights, including LGBT rights, or

any nonprofit organization that they simply

simply for having a relationship with

believed to have accepted foreign funding

foreigners, international NGOs, or foreign

while simultaneously engaging in political

states. As of now the law has yet to be

activity. The expansion in authority relieves

applied and thus is another tool to

the Ministry of providing the burden of proof.

encourage self-censorship.

x

A St. Petersburg LGBT organization,

„

Dima Yakovlev Law: also known as the

“Coming Out,” was investigated in early

Anti-Magnitsky Law, this law mirrors action

2013 under the Foreign Agent Law, the

taken by the United States to punish

charges being based on an advocacy

Russian citizens complicit in gross violations

brochure, a rally for inclusion, and a

of human rights. Under the Yakovlev law,

campaign against the propaganda law.

visa bans and asset freezes are mandated

The director was personally fined

against those that have violated the human

300,000 rubles, about $9,000 USD, and

rights and freedoms of the Russian people.

the organization itself was fined

Additionally, it forbids adoption of Russian

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

children by American citizens. More

„

x

4

In the summer of 2012, Russia created

pointedly for the Russian LGBT community,

a federal registry where it can blacklist

the law allows Russian officials to suspend

any website or web domain for hosting

the activity of any politically active

content deemed to be harmful to

nongovernmental organization that receives

minors. In early 2014, the Prosecutor

funds from foreign organizations or

General’s office gained the right to add

individuals.

to the registry extra-judicially any

Anti-Extremism Laws: misuse of antiextremism laws to target human rights advocates and other non-violent critics of the Russian government is not uncommon. Extremism is defined broadly in Russian law and this latitude has been exploited by authorities to restrict freedom of expression and to prosecute peaceful dissidents. The law on combating extremism has not been effective in countering the many extreme nationalist or neo-Nazi groups that openly

website guilty of encouraging extremism. As a result, over 500 websites have been blocked, many simply because they represent opposition views or are associated with opposition figures. In particular, because of the focus on information harmful to minors, the websites of LGBT organizations, and websites that provide information for LGBT persons, are under threat.

espouse and engage in bias-motivated

In addition to the laws described above, in

violence, the ostensible purpose of these

September 2013, Deputy Alexey Zhuravlev

laws. In 2014, amendments were

introduced a draft bill in the Duma to make

introduced making it a criminal offense to

“nontraditional sexual orientation” a cause for

repost “extremist literature” on social media.

denying custody to LGBT parents. The bill also

This has resulted in the arrest of a number

urged an amendment to the Family Code to

of LGBT citizens of Russia who have

authorize termination of parental rights of

commented on hate crimes committed

individuals raising children with same-sex

against LGBT people. If convicted under

partners and even of individuals suspected of

these amendments, a citizen can be

engaging in homosexual behavior. He

punished with up to five years in prison.

eventually withdrew the bill, stating that he

x

would revise it and introduce it at a later date.

In 2012, during the preparations for the Winter Olympiad in Sochi, Russia, a court in the Krasnodar region of

CREEP OF PROPAGANDA LAWS

southern Russia denied registration to

Russia's brand of homophobic legislation has

Pride House, the temporary location

become a major export. As many as nine

dedicated to hosting LGBT athletes and

Eastern European, Baltic, and Central Asian

volunteers. The court’s ruling cited the

states have had movements calling for

propaganda law but more pointedly

legislation emulating the Russian law. Several

ruled that the activities of Pride House

jurisdictions have adopted such measures and

would incite social and religious hatred,

others have ongoing public campaigns aimed at

and therefore were extremist in nature.

the introduction of such legislation.

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

„

„

Armenia: In August 2013, Armenian

the legislation despite the fact that the

authorities briefly introduced a bill aimed at

current text would clearly violate the

protecting Armenian family values from

country's human rights commitments. Under

public promotion of “non-traditional sexual

the Kyrgyz propaganda law, violators would

relationships.” The law would have included

face jail time of up to one year and severe

fines of $4,000.00 against violators. Mere

administrative fines. The law would target a

days after the introduction, officials removed

wider spectrum of acts than its Russian

the bill from consideration, insisting that

counterpart, applying to all public sharing of

international pressure played no part in its

information that portrays the LGBT

removal, and that it was shelved solely for

community in a positive light or of equal

its shortcomings.

societal value with the heterosexual community, regardless of the presence or

Belarus: In July 2013, the Belarusian

targeting of minors.

parliament included a propaganda law on a list of upcoming initiatives. The Liberal

„

attempting to initiate a referendum

guise of protecting the rights of sexual

proposing a bill that would emulate the

minorities, is the promotion and advocacy of

Russian propaganda bill failed to gain the

homosexuality, especially among minors,

necessary signatures for introduction.

thus destroying the family and public

However, homophobia remains a problem

morality.” As of now there has been no

in Latvia and there is no certainty that

formal introduction of a propaganda law.

additional attempts will not be made to get

However, new legislation introduced in

such legislation enacted.

information that would “discredit the

„

Lithuania: Lithuania is the only country in the region that already has a law similar to

institution of the family.” This legislation may

Russia's in place although it has been used

be a precursor to further laws on

very sparingly. Several other amendments

propaganda.

„

Latvia: In December 2014, political forces

Democratic Party claimed that “under the

January 2015 has urged a ban on

„

5

threatening the rights of the country’s LGBT

Kazakhstan: Kazakh lawmakers have

community have either been approved or

begun in earnest to introduce a propaganda

are under consideration in the Lithuanian

law in the country's parliament. Extremist

parliament. In recent months, several draft

rhetoric has accompanied demands for

amendments were submitted as part of

such a law, in some instances calling for

efforts to reinforce “traditional” views of the

blood tests to identify gay men. Calls for

family in the country’s legal framework. The

reinforced bans to public office and military

Lithuanian Parliament has already passed

service for members of the Kazakh LGBT

in the first reading an amendment

community have been issued.

establishing that criticism on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity cannot

Kyrgyzstan: Kyrgyz lawmakers have

be considered discrimination.

passed in the first reading a broader and harsher version of the Russian propaganda

„

Moldova: In June 2013, Moldovan

law. Additionally, the human rights body of

lawmakers passed a bill banning the

the Kyrgyz parliament has given approval to

promotion of “relationships other than those

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

linked to marriage and the family.” Only four months later the clause was removed,

6

Recommendations

despite strong objections from the Orthodox Church and officials in Moscow. The removal was likely due to a desire on the part of leadership to gain membership in the European Union. Some municipal laws, however, are still in effect. „

THE PRESIDENT In the lead-up to the Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia, President Obama publicly expressed concerns about the situation of Russia's LGBT community, stating: “Nobody's more offended

Ukraine and Crimea: Despite promising

than me by some of the anti-gay and lesbian

steps taken by lawmakers to improve the

legislation we've been seeing in Russia.”

human rights situation within Ukraine in the

This personal leadership by the president

hopes of gaining European Union (EU)

helped to focus global attention on Russia's

membership, several pieces of anti-LGBT

restrictive legislation. It followed the publication

legislation have gained traction within the

on December 6, 2011 of a Presidential

country. A propaganda law was ultimately

Memorandum directing all federal agencies to

withdrawn under pressure from E.U.

take steps to protect the human rights of

officials. The withdrawal, although

lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons

promising, was followed by the excision of

abroad. The Memorandum was an historic step

language protecting the LGBT community

forward for LGBT people worldwide as well as

from discrimination.

for U.S. global leadership on human rights. It

A transitional period of integration of Russian laws into Crimea began following the controversial annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and a disputed referendum. The Russian federal law

reflects a “whole of government” approach to advancing the rights of LGBT people, and calls for reporting by federal agencies on implementation of the Memorandum. The mandates of the Memorandum provide the

banning “propaganda of nontraditional

policy framework for U.S. government efforts to

sexual relations to minors” is considered law

halt the spread of restrictive propaganda and

in Crimea. A pride march was banned and the leader of Crimea, Sergei Aksionov, has publicly stated that the region will target the LGBT population if events or protests are

through its directives to combat criminalization of LGBT conduct abroad and to meaningfully respond to human rights abuse of LGBT persons abroad.

conducted. While some countries within Russia's sphere of influence, such as Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, are not pursuing propaganda laws, their LGBT communities remain under threat. Because homosexuality remains criminalized, few would risk speaking publicly in favor of LGBT rights and, if they did, they would likely face criminal charges.

similar laws inspired by Russia, in particular

The first section of the December 2011 Presidential Memorandum calls for “Combating Criminalization of LGBT Status or Conduct abroad.” This should be understood to include work against propaganda laws as these laws have the effect of criminalizing any expression of personal identity, which is indistinguishable from criminalizing LGBT status.

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

Recommendations

7

has its own unique set of facts and

The President should continue to seek out opportunities to publicly express concerns about the protection of the human rights of members of Russia's LGBT community as well as the spread of Russian-inspired oppression to

circumstances that must be taken into account and incorporated into individual country strategies. Within each country, U.S. agencies should work closely with community-based human rights defenders to develop strategies to: „

neighboring countries.

Challenge existing criminalization and propaganda laws and proposed legislation

The President should task agencies

as well as other efforts to curtail the rights of

implementing the 2011 Memorandum to report

LGBT people.

specifically on the steps each agency is taking to confront the situation in Russia and stop the

„

Encourage governments to protect freedom of speech for all minority communities,

spread of oppression to surrounding countries.

including the LGBT community. Such

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

protections should extend to online discussions.

The United States Department of State has a unique capacity to influence events in these

„

Discourage attempts by parliaments to

countries through its work through embassies,

introduce new legislation that either seeks

in bilateral negotiation and in multinational fora.

to criminalize homosexuality or introduces

Recommendations

restrictions on free speech, assembly, or

The Department of State can strengthen its

communities.

association for LGBT people and

implementation of the 2011 Memorandum with respect to Russia and surrounding countries in

„

Encourage debate and free speech around LGBT issues by engaging broad segments

the following areas:

of civil society, such as faith, business,

„

Developing individual country strategies

„

Engaging with human rights defenders

„

Mobilizing international institutions

„

Working with international sports bodies

„

Creating a special envoy for the human

human rights, and other influential leaders. „

Provide legal and other assistance to victims of propaganda laws or other laws that violate the rights of LGBT people.

„

Protect LGBT people from bias-motivated violence and ensure that such violence is

rights of LGBT people

condemned by public officials and investigated and prosecuted by the

DEVELOPING INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY

authorities.

STRATEGIES Russia is exerting a strong influence over the political and social environments of its neighbors, rooted in part in the former Soviet Union structure as well as important transnational institutions like the Russian Orthodox Church. However, each country also

„

Broaden civil society coalitions advocating protections of the rights of LGBT persons by promoting inclusion of LGBT individuals and organizations in coalitions advocating other human rights protections and by identifying common causes of rights violations, e.g.

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

„

8

movements to protect “traditional values”

rights defenders and NGOs in the region

that target members of religious minorities

(Global Equality Fund, Dignity For All Fund,

considered to be foreign or non-traditional

Human Rights and Democracy Fund,

as well as LGBT persons.

Gender-Based Violence Emergency Response and Protection Initiative, Lifeline

Ensure information on violations of rights of

Embattled Civil Society Organization

LGBT people is being collected, particularly

Assistance Fund). In addition, embassies

through U.S. embassies, and that this

should disseminate information about

information is incorporated into each

exchange opportunities with the United

country’s annual Human Rights Report.

States, such as through the International Visitors Leadership Program.

ENGAGING WITH HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS

„

Embassies should assist human rights

Embassies throughout the region must be

defenders and NGOs in their efforts to

attuned to the situation of LGBT people in their

document human rights violations

respective countries. Embassy staff should

committed against the LGBT community.

develop and foster relationships with individual

„

The United States should remove or reduce

LGBT activists and organizations. Such

barriers faced by those fleeing human rights

relationships should not be limited to registered

abuses based on sexual orientation and/or

NGOs, as governments often make such

gender identity as they apply for refugee

registration impossible or create extraordinary

status or for asylum in the United States.

barriers to such registration. Embassy staff should ensure that individuals and organizations from throughout the country are included and not simply focus on those in the largest cities or where embassies and consulates are maintained. Inclusion of LGBT people into larger civil society meetings can play a key role in helping those groups integrate into the civil society of each country. Outreach efforts should be carefully orchestrated to include women and transgender people who often are not as publicly known as their gay male counterparts. „

Depending on the safety and strategic nature of such events, embassies should host events that are LGBT-focused, including “Pride” events as well as events marking the International Day Against Homophobia (IDAHO) and the Transgender Day of Remembrance.

„

„

Embassies should post on their websites the 2013 U.S. Guidelines for Supporting Human Rights Defenders, translated into Russian and other local languages, which will help clarify what assistance LGBT and other human rights defenders can and cannot expect from the U.S. government and the embassy.

MOBILIZING INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS One unique factor in favor of the rights of LGBT persons in Russia's neighboring countries is the presence of strong multilateral institutions that in one form or another prioritize human rights obligations as part of membership in these organizations. The United States is a member of some of these organizations, and works closely with others. The U.S. government should work with the European Union, the Council of Europe,

Embassies should disseminate information

the Organization for Security and Cooperation in

about U.S. funding opportunities to human

Europe, and other international organizations to

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

9

negotiate advances for LGBT rights and/or

there are “clear indications of a systemic

prevent backwards movement with countries

threat to the rule of law.” As propaganda

who are members of or are preparing for

legislation clearly contravenes rights to

membership in these institutions.

speech and assembly, the Commission is

„

well within its rights to engage the member

All countries who aspire to join the

state.

European Union (E.U.) must meet minimal standards on human rights protections,

„

„

Utilize Council of Europe influence to push

including for LGBT people. This

for repeal of discriminatory laws and for the

requirement has recently resulted in LGBT

passage of laws that are inclusive of LGBT

issues being put squarely on the table in

communities in member countries, including

Ukraine. The E.U. initially backed down on

Russia, as well as in regards to states

its demand for a non-discrimination law,

outside of Europe that have or are being

which it had originally called for in exchange

considered for special status. As “Partner

for visa liberalization. However, a new non-

for Democracy” status is beneficial to

discrimination bill has recently been

prospective economic partners, states that

proposed in the Ukrainian legislature.

are under consideration for this status,

Legislators in Georgia passed a nationwide

including Kazakhstan, should be required to

non-discrimination law that explicitly

remove laws that negatively impact the

includes sexual orientation and gender

rights of the LGBT community and to refrain

identity (although there are some

from passing new such laws. Countries in

deficiencies in its enforcement

the Council of Europe considering laws of

mechanisms). The United States should

this nature should be referred for advisory

partner with the E.U. to promote its use of

opinions from the Venice Commission,

leverage, particularly with E.U. accession

which can provide detailed analysis of

states, to move states to comply with E.U.

proposed legislation against international

laws and standards.

and European human rights standards and recommendations for bringing those

The United States should work with E.U.

proposed laws into compliance.

leadership to urge member-states to repeal homophobic legislation and reject any

„

The Obama Administration has exerted

attempts to pass future discriminatory

strong leadership at the Organization for

legislation. States such as Lithuania, a

Security and Cooperation in Europe

current member state that has a legally

(OSCE) on advancing the human rights of

binding system in place to protect the

LGBT people, and inclusion of LGBT issues

constitutionally guaranteed right of freedom

in the organization's efforts to promote

speech while simultaneously maintaining a

tolerance and non-discrimination and

propaganda law, should be placed under

combat hate crime. The OSCE is unique in

scrutiny by the European Commission.

its recognition of the inherent dignity of the

According to the framework established in

individual at the “core of comprehensive

March 2013, the Commission may enter into

security.” To that end, the U.S. mission

a dialogue with a Member State by issuing

should urge the participating states of the

a “rule of law opinion” in such cases where

OSCE to meet their obligations to protect

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

human rights and fundamental freedoms, as

matters relating to gender identity and sexual

well as to combat hate crimes targeting

orientation.

LGBT people. This should include pressing

„

participating states to collect and publish

(FIFA), including the U.S. member of the

prosecutors, and promote interaction

Executive Committee, regarding Russia’s

between law enforcement and LGBT

selection as World Cup site for 2018.

communities to prevent and report violence

Encourage scrutiny of the selection process

and support victims. The Office of

in the aim of excluding any candidate host

Democratic Institutions and Human Rights

country for the World Cup that maintains

as well as the Special Representative on

discriminatory legislation that targets LGBT

the Freedom of the Media should be

persons.

encouraged to publish guidelines on the protection of freedom of expression and

Work with leadership of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association

hate crime data, train police and

„

10

„

U.S. officials must stress to the International

related rights in the context of propaganda

Olympic Committee the importance of

and related laws.

removing from consideration any future candidate host-city that currently has or is

Urge the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on minority issues to conduct investigatory visits to countries that either have passed or are considering passage of similarly discriminatory legislation in order to raise awareness of rights violations committed as a result.

deliberating the introduction of propaganda legislation or broader methods of criminalization. This is particularly salient as Kazakhstan is currently under consideration as a site for the 2022 Winter Olympics. Partnering with leadership of the Committee to amend Principle 6 of the Olympic Charter

WORKING WITH INTERNATIONAL SPORTS BODIES

to include sexual orientation and gender identity as banned grounds for discrimination was successful following the

Sports can serve as a bridge between divergent

Olympic in Sochi, Russia. Additionally, U.S.

viewpoints on human rights, providing a shared

officials must work with the IOC to ensure

experience through which human beings can

that Pride House is incorporated into all

see each other as equals on the field of play

future Olympics.

and where the spirit of cooperation and community can be fostered. In recent years,

CREATING A SPECIAL ENVOY FOR THE

human rights activists have seen international

HUMAN RIGHTS OF LGBT PEOPLE

sporting events as key moments for targeted advocacy efforts.

The effort to combat propaganda legislation inspired and promoted by Russia will require the

The United States, through its engagement with

concerted effort of many actors across a variety

international sports federations, such as the

of agencies. This is an example of the type of

Fédération Internationale de Football

multi-country, multi-agency effort that would

Association (FIFA) and the International

greatly benefit from the appointment of a

Olympic Committee, can advance inclusion on

Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBT People.

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

„

A Special Envoy would coordinate

the LGBT community to overlook LGBT

continued U.S. leadership on the global

issues during the resolution of the crisis. A

stage, upholding the focus within the U.S.

Special Envoy would provide a consistent

government on issues affecting LGBT

voice advocating for the safety and dignity

people—namely discrimination,

of LGBT persons in all cases.

persecution, and criminalization—by participating in inter-agency policy planning

„

cultural heritage and this is certainly true in

officials as needed. Russia and the region

the region. A Special Envoy should develop

should be an early focus of a Special Envoy

a strategy of working with other nations to

as there are numerous countries at risk of

undermine this narrative, which politicizes

moving backwards in the protection of their

and legitimizes homophobia.

LGBT citizens. The appointment of a Special Envoy would signify to foreign governments a long-term commitment by the United States to the protection of the human rights of LGBT people. The Special Envoy would organize U.S. activity with other governments in multilateral meetings and in specific instances of crisis. The Special Envoy would also navigate the extensive network of U.S. embassies and missions, providing expertise to staff as they interact with vulnerable groups. „

„

The Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 directs the President to report to Congress, publish, and update a list of individuals, among others, responsible for human rights violations committed within Russia against individuals seeking to promote human rights. The Special Envoy should lead the State Department in monitoring conditions in Russia and ensure that those responsible for human rights violations against those seeking to promote the rights of LGBT people are included on the list. Those

A Special Envoy would work to ascertain

included would be subject to visa bans and

how U.S. foreign policy may best help

asset freezes.

vulnerable LGBT communities. Working in partnership with human rights defenders on the ground leads to more effective U.S. strategies to encourage foreign

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE The Department of Justice provides technical assistance to governments around the world

governments to decriminalize

including on efforts to address hate crimes and

homosexuality and protect the rights of their LGBT citizens. A Special Envoy would provide the leadership to seek out and cultivate those partnerships, in conjunction with embassies. „

The most homophobic nations dismiss homosexuality as a lifestyle foreign to their

and elevating issues before appropriate

„

11

bias-motivated violence, to promote institutional change within the prosecution, police, and judiciary and to encourage cooperation among those institutions and civil society. This ongoing work should be LGBT-inclusive and DOJ should

Even in the direst of situations and the most

seek out opportunities to partner with LGBT

tumultuous of times, human rights remains

groups and individuals who often face the brunt

a core commitment of U.S. foreign policy. In

of homophobic sentiment.

Ukraine, there were calls even from allies to

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

Recommendations

Recommendations

„

„

Increase and expand international training

12

USAID has adopted hortatory language

programs through the International

regarding nondiscrimination in the provision

Criminal Investigative Training

of services. This is a welcome step but

Assistance Program (ICITAP).

more needs to be done on this front. USAID

Kazakhstan, Armenia, and Moldova, which

should develop better mechanisms to

have had ICITAP programs in the past, and

review service provision policies of

Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan, countries that

subgrantees and should move towards

have current ICITAP programs, are

adding nondiscrimination language to its

countries that have considered propaganda

employment policies.

legislation in the past, are currently considering such legislation, or have

„

Development Partnership is designed to

movements calling for such legislation.

provide for needs assessments, leadership

When hate crime training is the focus of a

development, and coordination and

relationship, it is imperative that LGBT

integration. It is imperative that this work

issues be incorporated as an area of

move forward in the region and that there is

concern. While ICITAP's focus in a specific

sufficient funding for it to accomplish its

country might be on issues such as anti-

goals.

corruption, there remain many opportunities to utilize these bilateral relationships to

USAID's recently-launched LGBT Global

CONGRESS

reassert universal values such as protection In the 113th Congress, two bills were introduced

of marginalized communities. „

to further global protection of the human rights Expand efforts of the Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance, and Training (OPDAT) to include regular hate crime training initiatives tailored for foreign criminal justice personnel to incorporate concerns about the treatment of LGBT people victimized by anti-LGBT violence.

of LGBT people. The Global Respect Act would allow for visa bans for individuals found to have violated the human rights of LGBT people and was inspired in large part by the visa ban language of the Magnitsky Act. The International Human Rights Defense Act would, among other things, call for the creation of a Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBT people.

USAID As the lead United States government agency working in communities around the world to

Recommendations „

The Global Respect Act and the

alleviate extreme poverty, USAID has

International Human Rights Defense Act

“democracy, human rights and governance”

should be reintroduced in the 114th

projects in several countries in this region,

Congress and the leaders of these bills

making it well-positioned to impact the lives of

should make every effort to ensure that they

LGBT people in each community in which it

are introduced in a bi-partisan fashion.

works. Inclusive development benefits the host country as well as marginalized communities.

„

Members sitting on caucuses influential in the region should invite engagement from

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

human rights defenders to better inform policy decisions. These bodies, including

13

Conclusion

the Baltics Caucus, Ukraine Caucus,

„

Azerbaijan Caucus, Duma Congress Study

Concerns about the deterioration of the human

Group, Human Rights Caucus, Lantos

rights situation in Russia have been a dominant

Commission, Helsinki Commission, informal

discussion in recent years and an important part

Russia (Sochi) Working Group, should work

of this discussion has always been the country’s

with activists and defenders to develop

influence in the region. Russia's recent

strategies to raise awareness of LGBT

crackdown on the human rights of LGBT people

rights issues in their respective area of

is not an exception and we are witnessing an

interest. In addition, the Equality Caucus

alarming spread of this sentiment and indeed

should continue its engagement on the

even cut-and-paste versions of the propaganda

concerns of LGBT people in Russia and

law. Although the United States may have

should broaden that area of interest to the

limited influence in Russia itself, there are

entire region.

countries in the region where that is not the

Individual members who have an interest in the region should pursue additional opportunities to elevate issues of LGBT rights through resolutions, letters, meetings, etc.

„

case and where American influence can play an important role. It is important that the U.S. keeps its attention on the region and maintains LGBT issues as a central element of its foreign policy. Countries such as Georgia and Moldova show that positive developments are possible,

Members of Congress should organize

and it is incumbent upon the United States to

Congressional Delegations to the region

ensure that the already-marginalized LGBT

and work with US-based NGOs to identify

communities across the region are not left

key NGOs, activists and government

behind.

officials for in-country meetings. „

NGOs should create opportunities for international human rights defenders and LGBT leaders to meet with members of Congress when they are in the United States.

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

HOW TO STOP RUSSI A F ROM EXPORTING HOM OPHOBI A

14

Summary of Human Rights First’s Work in the Region Human Rights First has a proven track record of raising awareness of the rising tide of homophobia in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and Russia. This includes confronting the spread of propaganda laws in Russia's sphere of influence through public awareness campaigns, advocacy, and creating and maintaining relationships with representatives of vulnerable LGBT communities.

„

Sending a delegation to Russia in February 2014 to meet with human rights defenders in Moscow and St. Petersburg before engaging with athletes, activists, and members of the media at the Winter Olympics in Sochi.

„

Hosting a contingent of Russian LGBT human rights defenders in the United States in regional settings as well as in the nation's capital for meetings with Congress, the State Department, and the White House, including a congressional briefing with Greg Louganis.

„

Bringing together members of the Russian, Kyrgyz, and Latvian LGBT communities at Human Rights First annual Human Rights Summits to speak about the situation in their home countries and what the United States can do to address their vulnerabilities.

„

Maintaining close partnerships with LGBT human rights defenders from Russia, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, among others.

„

Aiding human rights defenders in Lithuania, helping to delay the introduction of new propaganda legislation in the country.

„

Publishing an Op-Ed in The Hill and organizing State Department meetings to prepare for engagement with Belarusian leadership in advance of the International Ice Hockey Federation World Championship in Minsk.

„

Engaging in work with Kyrgyz human rights defenders to advocate for tabling propaganda legislation in the build up to Kyrgyzstan Independence Day.

„ „

Communicating directly to President Obama on LGBT issues in regards to his trip to the Baltics. Pushing for keeping LGBT human rights on the radar as the larger political crisis unfolds in Ukraine. A Human Rights First delegation met with several Ukrainian LGBT activists this year.

„

Creating and regularly updating a series of resources on the spread of propaganda laws, including regional maps.

„

Connecting with lead activists and members of Parliament in Georgia and issuing press statements regarding passage of anti-discrimination law.

„

Attending international conferences, including those organized by ILGA-Europe to build and foster connections with activists from around the region.

H U M AN R I G H T S F I R S T

WHERE TO FIND US 75 Broad Street, 31st Floor, New York, NY 10004

805 15th Street, N.W., #900 Washington, DC 20005

1303 San Jacinto Street, 9th Floor at South Texas College of Law, Houston, TX 77002

Tel: 212.845.5200 Fax: 212.845.5299

Tel: 202.547.5692 Fax: 202.543.5999

Tel: 713.955.1360 Fax: 713.955.1359

human rights first.org

 

+LVWRU\RIWKH ,QWHUQDWLRQDO&RQIHUHQFHRQ 7UDQVJHQGHU/DZDQG (PSOR\PHQW3ROLF\,QF 7KH,QWHUQDWLRQDO&RQIHUHQFHRQ7UDQVJHQGHU/DZDQG(PSOR\PHQW3ROLF\,QFKDV EHFRPHNQRZQDV,&7/(3DQG7KH7UDQVJHQGHU/DZ&RQIHUHQFHDQGDOVRDV 75$16*(1BBWKHEODQNLVWKH\HDURIWKDWFRQIHUHQFH 

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

 OU/HH0F.HOODU)U\H0F.HQ]LH6WDIIHGWKHVW,&7/(3&RQIHUHQFH 7KHVHZHUHWKHGD\VRIOLWWOHID[XVH,KDGQRWKHDUGRI,QWHUQHW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ0RVWRIWKHSXEOLFLW\ZDVJDLQHGE\SODFLQJQRWLFHVLQ UHJLRQDODQGQDWLRQDOPHHWLQJPDLORXWVDQGLQWKH,)*(7UDQVJHQGHU 7DSHVWU\RU'DOODV'HQQ\¶V&KU\VDOLVTXDUWHUO\:KLOHWKHFRPPLWWHH ZRUNHG,DWWHQGHGWKH)HEUXDU\7H[DV73DUW\DQGWKH0DUFK ,)*(&RQYHQWLRQ,PXVWFRQIHVVWKDWZLWKRXWWKRVHWZRHYHQWV ,SUREDEO\ZRXOGQRWKDYHJRWWHQWKHHYHQWRIIRIWKHJURXQG2I VSHFLDODQGSURIRXQGKHOSGXULQJWKRVHGD\VZHUHWKH73DUW\ RUJDQL]HUV&\QWKLDDQG/LQGD3KLOOLSV,WZDVWKURXJKWKHPWKDW,PHW 7HUH3UDVVH)UHGULFNVRQ ZKRLVWKHZHEPLVWUHVVRIWKLVVLWH'XULQJ WKRVHWZRHYHQWVDQGWKHZRUNVKRSV,ZDVDOORZHGWRSUHVHQW7* ODZ\HUYROXQWHHUVEHJDQWRVXUIDFH

7HUH3UDVVH



,QWKHZRUNVKRSVDQGIOLHUV,OHWLWEHNQRZQWKDWWKH*&7&&RPPLWWHH ZRXOGKRVWDFRQIHUHQFHLQ$XJXVWLQ+RXVWRQ7H[DVDQG DGGUHVVWKHIROORZLQJDUHDVRIWUDQVJHQGHUODZ±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¶V HYHQW

&\QWKLDDQG/LQGD3KLOOLSV



,Q-DQXDU\,&7/(3EHFDPHD7H[DVQRWIRUSURILWFRUSRUDWLRQ 7KHRULJLQDO'LUHFWRUVZHUH6KDURQ6WXDUW0DUWLQH5RWKEODWW/DXUD 6NDHU-DFNLH7KRUQHDQGP\VHOI7KLV%RDUGPHWIRUWKHILUVWWLPHDW WKH7H[DV73DUW\LQ6DQ$QWRQLRLQ)HEUXDU\7KH3KLOOLSVDQG WKH7H[DV73DUW\ZHUHVRPHRI,&7/(3¶VVWDXQFKHVWDQGPRVW JHQHURXVVXSSRUWHUVIRUPDQ\\HDUV

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ĂǁKĸĐĞƌ dĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJKĸĐĞƌ

ĚŝƚŽƌͲŝŶͲŚŝĞĨŽĨ /ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂů>ĂǁEĞǁƐ

ƚͲ>ĂƌŐĞŽƵŶĐŝůDĞŵďĞƌƐ;ϳͿ

ŝǀŝƐŝŽŶŚĂŝƌƐ;ϭϮͿ

/ŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽŶŽŵŝŶĂƚĞƐŽŵĞŽŶĞĨŽƌŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞƐĞƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƐŽƌƚŽƐĞůĨͲŶŽŵŝŶĂƚĞ͕ĐŽŶƚĂĐƚƚŚĞŚĂŝƌŽĨƚŚĞ EŽŵŝŶĂƟŶŐŽŵŵŝƩĞĞ͕'ĂďƌŝĞůůĞD͘ƵĐŬůĞLJ͕ĂƐƐŽŽŶĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞǀŝĂĞͲŵĂŝůƚŽ[email protected] ǁŝƚŚ ĂĐŽƉLJƚŽ^ĞĐƟŽŶŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ>ĞĂŶŶĞWĨĂƵƚnj;[email protected]Ϳ͘ dŚĞEŽŵŝŶĂƟŶŐŽŵŵŝƩĞĞǁŝůůŵĂŬĞŝƚƐŶŽŵŝŶĂƟŽŶƐƌĞƉŽƌƚƚŽƚŚĞ^ĞĐƟŽŶŽƵŶĐŝůĂƚƚŚĞ^ĞĐƟŽŶ^ƉƌŝŶŐDĞĞƟŶŐŝŶtĂƐŚŝŶŐƚŽŶ͕͕ ŝŶƉƌŝůϮϬϭϱ͘ůĞĐƟŽŶƐǁŝůůďĞŚĞůĚĂƚƚŚĞ^ĞĐƟŽŶďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐŵĞĞƟŶŐĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞŶŶƵĂůDĞĞƟŶŐŝŶƵŐƵƐƚϮϬϭϱ͘ WƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽƚŚĞ^ĞĐƟŽŶ͛ƐLJůĂǁƐ͕ƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐƉĞƌƐŽŶƐǁŝůůƐĞƌǀĞĂƐƚŚĞEŽŵŝŶĂƟŶŐŽŵŵŝƩĞĞĨŽƌϮϬϭϰʹϮϬϭϱLJĞĂƌ͘ dŚĞEŽŵŝŶĂƟŶŐŽŵŵŝƩĞĞŝƐĐŽŵƉƌŝƐĞĚŽĨŵĞŵďĞƌƐǁŚŽƐĞƌǀĞďLJǀŝƌƚƵĞŽĨƚŚĞŝƌƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ^ĞĐƟŽŶĂŶĚ ƚǁŽŽƚŚĞƌŵĞŵďĞƌƐĂƉƉŽŝŶƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞ^ĞĐƟŽŶŚĂŝƌ͕ĂƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞLJůĂǁƐͿ͘ Gabrielle M. Buckley, ŚĂŝƌŽĨƚŚĞEŽŵŝŶĂƟŶŐŽŵŵŝƩĞĞ /ŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞWĂƐƚŚĂŝƌ [email protected] William R. Black [email protected]

Marcelo E. Bombau ŚĂŝƌ [email protected] Michael E. Burke &ŽƌŵĞƌŚĂŝƌ [email protected] Barton Legum &ŽƌŵĞƌŚĂŝƌ [email protected]

Sara P. Sandford sŝĐĞŚĂŝƌ [email protected] >ŝƐĂ:͘^ĂǀŝƩ ŚĂŝƌͲůĞĐƚ ůƐĂǀŝƩΛĐƌŽǁĞůů͘ĐŽŵ

Expand Your International Law Library Magna Carta and the Rule of Law ĚŝƚĞĚďLJŶĚƌĞĂDĂƌƟŶĞnj͕ĂŶŝĞůDĂŐƌĂǁ:ƌ͕͘ĂŶĚZŽLJ͘ƌŽǁŶĞůů// T This fascinating book, with a forward by former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, was written by a distinguished group of international scholars. It marks the O 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta and explores its background and 8 tthe profound impact it has had on fundamental rule of law issues.

Ϯ ϮϬϭϰ͕ϰϳϰWĂŐĞƐ͕ϲdžϵ WƌŽĚƵĐƚĐŽĚĞ͗ϱϮϭϬϮϴϲ >ŝƐƚWƌŝĐĞ͗Ψϲϵ͘ϵϱ /ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂů^ĞĐƟŽŶDĞŵďĞƌWƌŝĐĞ͗Ψϱϱ͘ϵϱ

Corporate Responsibility for Human Rights Impacts ĚŝƚĞĚďLJ>ĂƌĂůĞĐŚĞƌ͕EĂŶĐLJ