Previous issue: 37
In this issue:
Next issue: 39
An Iron Curtain Closes Against HIV-positives
1 December 1995, MOSCOW - The Russian Government has
confirmed the type of medical certificate showing HIV status required
to receive a Russian entry visa, according to which people with
HIV/AIDS will be barred from coming to Russia for longer than 3
months.
This certificate signifies official resolve to implement the controversial AIDS law passed by the Russian Parliament earlier this year. The supposed purpose of the medical certificate is to restrict HIV-positive foreigners from being on Russian territory long-term, according to a representative of the Russian Government Information Center, Aleksandr L. Voznesensky.
"A certificate system is ineffective in terms of public health, discriminatory in terms of human rights, and ludicrous in terms of feasibility," asserted Dr. Lola Karimova, a Moscow gynaecologist and the Women's Health Director of the AESOP Center.
The Russian government resolution approving this certificate, issued 25 November 1995, directly contradicts this year's slogan for World AIDS Day - "Shared Rights, Shared Responsibilities" - by denying people with HIV/AIDS the basic human rights to privacy and freedom of movement. Last year on this day, Russia even signed the Paris Declaration guaranteeing people with HIV/AIDS equal access to work, education and travel.
The official number of registered HIV and AIDS cases in Russia as of 1
December 1995 is 1,033, although most experts agree the actual number
is much higher.
Romanian Penal Code Reform Rejected
The Romanian Chamber of Deputies has rejected a package of revisions
to the Romanian penal code, a package which would have included
amendments to Article 200--Romania's notorious law criminalizing
consensual homosexual acts between adults.
The amendments would have represented a partial but not complete decriminalization of homosexuality. Article 200, paragraph 1 of the penal code currently punishes any adult, consensual homosexual act with one to five years' imprisonment. The proposed revisions would have reserved the same punishment for homosexual acts "committed in public or which cause public scandal." An additional provision would have imposed one to five years' imprisonment for "organizing, associating, or any act of proselytism" for homosexuality.
The proposed revisions had been widely criticized by Amnesty International and other human rights organizations for their vagueness and for potential threats to freedoms of speech, assembly, and association. However, the possibility of even a partial liberalization of laws affecting homosexuality had roused a storm of controversy in Romania. The Orthodox Church spearheaded a year-long petition campaign calling for increased penalties for gay and lesbian sex.
In the November 21 Chamber of Deputies vote, three extremist parties - the Party of Romanian National Unity, the Greater Romania Party, and the Socialist Workers' Party - cast the deciding votes against the penal code package. All three cited the alleged easing of sanctions against homosexuality as a crucial reason behind their opposition.
The Government must now introduce new proposals for penal code reform in the next parliamentary session.
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission has helped lead a four-year campaign for repeal of Romania's draconian laws against homosexuality. We urge the Romanian government to end its intolerable delays, and to move quickly to meet international human-rights norms as well as its own treaty commitments.
We urge you to help pressure the Romanian government to act now.
Sample letter to Romanian government officials
DearIn its 1993 resolution recommending the admission of Romania, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe declared that it "expects that Romania will shortly change its legislation in such a way that . . . Article 200 of the Penal Code will no longer consider as a criminal offense homosexual acts perpetrated in private between consenting adults."
I am writing to express my outrage that, two years later, Romania has still failed to meet its commitments.
In failing to pass adequate reforms to the Penal Code, the Parliament of Romania has flagrantly rejected its international human-rights commitments.
Moreover, even the proposed revision fell flagrantly short of the expectations expressed by the Council of Europe. References to homosexual acts "which cause public scandal" would have left the way open for continued prosecution, blackmail, and police harassment of homosexuals in Romania. Moreover, new provisions against "organizing, associating, or any act of proselytism" would have constitued a severe violation of the freedoms of speech, assembly, and association guaranteed to all Romanian citizens.
Romania's record of broken promises on this issue must be brought to an end. The persecution and torture of gays and lesbians in Romania has been strongly criticized not only by the Council of Europe but by many other international organizations. In rejecting penal code reforms in its November 21 vote, the Romanian parliament has paved the way for further isolation and condemnation of Romania by the international community.
We urge you to press for quick passage of an alternative revision of Article 200, which will eliminate *all* legal penalties for consensual homosexual acts, and which will honorably and finally fulfil Romania's obligations.
Sincerely
Send to:
The Honorable Petru Tanase TAVALA
Chairman, Committee for Human Rights
Senate of Romania
Palatul Parlamentului
Bucharest, ROMANIA
The Honorable Oliviu Gherman
Chairman, Permanent Bureau of the Senate
Senate of Romania (etc.)
The Honorable Adrian Nastase
Presidinte
Camera Deputatilor
Palatul Parlamentului (etc.)
for more information, contact:
Scott Long
tel. 361-131-2589
fax 361-112-4982
email: slong@osiris.elte.hu
Proposed Danish Legislation on anti-discrimination on
Labor Market
By Steffen Jensen
The Danish government will shortly propose a bill to Parliament on discrimination in the labor market. The minister for Labor Affairs has announced that the bill will include a prohibition on discrimination on the ground of sexuel orientation.
Denmark has for several years had anti-discrimination law covering
sexual orientation in any other fields than the labor market.
New Legislation for Survivors in the Netherlands
By Michiel Odijk
Just before the end of 1995 the Dutch Senate has accepted a new legislation for survivors that does contain some improvements for gay and lesbian couples (if they live together). However, the new legislation will deteriorate the financial position of widows and widowers.
The old Act for Widows and Orphans was to be replaced by new legislation, and after acceptance of the second chamber of the Parliament the previous bill for new legislation failed in the Senate. A revised bill had to be drafted, discussed in the cabinet, redrafted, discussed in the second chamber of the Parliament and then discussed in the first chamber of the Parliament (Senate). It was the second chamber of Parliament that introduced the equality for gay and lesbian couples in the legislation. The Senate showed much reluctance against the bill, because in would introduce an income treshold for financial support, and thus about 10.000 people would loose the financial support the could get under the previous legislation. The income criteria will be used from 1998 onwards; equal rights for married and unmarried (cohabiting) couples will be guaranteed in 1996.
After the reluctance in the Senate, the vice minister for Social
Affairs and Employment Robin Linschoten offered extra money for
reconciliation in the cases in which people would loose the
benefits. Then, the majority of the Senate accepted the bill.
ILGA represented at the Forum Civil Euromed
By Pere Cruells
The Governmental Euromediterranean Conference in Barcelona was followed by the Forum Civil Euromed with the idea of talking about civil problems and giving more importance to civil affairs than the Governmental one. The Forum finished last Friday (Dec. 1). ILGA Secretaries General, Jordi Petit and Inge Wallaert, were invited to attend and participate in the Forum.
The opening ceremony was presided by the Prince of Spain, Felipe de
Borbon, and some speechs of Catalan and Spanish authorities. Mrs
Cristina Alberdi, Minister of Social affairs talked about the
importance and advances reached at the Beijing Conference and she
remarked the right to the difference of the people. Jordi Petit
presented a comunication on one of the Forums where he talked about
ILGA and its objectives. Inge Wallaert expressed her thouhgts related
with visibility of lesbian women on Mediterranean countries,
especially on those from the South part of the Mediterranean where the
rights of women are not already considered.
EUROPOL wants to register sexual habits
According to the Danish newspaper "Det Nye Notat" (an anti-EU
campaigning newspaper) officials of the Council of the European Union
have produced a document about the European policeorganisation
EUROPOL. "Det Nye Notat" refers to a newsletter "Circular Letter
Fortress Europe".
According to documents in the possession of the newspaper, EUROPOL is proposed to get the right to establish an Analysis Register containing personal informations about "interesting persons". Among the information that could be registrered are: race, political beleif, religious belief, state of health and sexual habits!!!
The document should be part of proposal for a EUROPOL convention produced by the Spanish presidency of the EU.
As a comment to this piece of news, Alan Reekie has sent these quotations from Title VI: Provisions on cooperation in the fields of Justice and Home Affairs, of the "Maastricht Treaty":
It seems to me (i.e. Alan Reekie, ed) that this Treaty explicitly limits the collection (and exchange) of information by Europol to that which is necessary for "the purposes of preventing and combatting terrorism, unlawful drug trafficking and other serious forms of international crime", in accordance notably with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Resolutions of the European Parliament, and that therefore any collection or recording of information about individuals' "sexual habits" that is not so necessary would amount to a breach of the Treaty. I should be very surprised if any formal proposal from Spain failed to recognise this limitation. Unfortunately, I would also not be surprised if an "anti-EU campaigning newspaper" were to make discreditable allegations that turn out to be false when investigated, as this has occurred frequently in the past.Art K.1
For the purpose of achieving the objectives of the Union, in particular the free movement of persons, and without prejudice to the powers of the European Community, member-States shall regard the following areas as matters of common interest:
- (1) asylum policy
- (2) rules governing the crossing by persons of the external borders of the member-States and the exercise of controls thereon,
- (3) immigration policy and policy regarding nationals of third countries:
- a. conditions of entry and movement by nationals of third countries on the territory of member-States;
- b. conditions of residence by nationals of third countries on the territory of member-States, including family reunion and access to employment,
- c. combating unauthorised immigration, residence and work by nationals of third countries on the territory of member-States,
- (4) combatting drug-addiction, in so far as this is not covered by (7) to (9),
- (5) combatting fraud on an international scale in so far as this is not covered by (7) to (9),
- (6) judicial cooperation in civil matters,
- (7) judicial cooperation in criminal matters,
- (8) customs cooperation,
- (9) police cooperation for the purposes of preventing and combatting terrorism, unlawful drug trafficking and other serious forms of international crime, including if necessary certain aspects of customs cooperation in connection with the organisation of a Union-wide system for exchanging information within a European Police Office (Europol).
Art. K2
- (1) The matters referred to in Art. K.1 shall be dealt with in compliance with the European Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950 and the Convention relating to the status of refugees of 28 July 1951 and having regard to the protection afforded by member-States to persons persecuted on political grounds.
- (2) This Title shall not affect the exercise of the responsibilities incumbent upon member-States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security.
Art K.6
The Presidency and the Commission shall regularly inform the European Parliament of discussions in the areas covered by this Title. The Presidency shall consult the European Parliament on the principal aspects of activities in the areas referred to in this Title and shall ensure that the views of the European Parliament are taken duly into consideration. The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council or make recommendations to it. Each year, it shall hold a debate on the progress made in implementation of the areas referred to in this Title.
The government of the Czech Republic has deleted a proposed gay-partnership law from the latest draft of family-law legislation, calling gay couplings "an inferior form of marriage" and noting that "only three European countries recognize this right demanded by the homosexual minority."
The gay activist group Soho is "very upset" by the development and
urges international protest to Parliament Chairman Milan Uhde,
Predseda Poslanecke snemovny, Parlamentu CR, Snemovni 4, 118 26 Prague
1, Czech Republic. "There is still a good chance of influencing the
whole process," the activists said.
European Union IGC-96 preparations
By Alan Reekie
The 90 pages of Conclusions of the Presidency of the EU Council Meeting held in Madrid on 15 and 16 December 1995 include details of the preparations for the Inter-governmental Conference to be held in 1996. In particular, Annex 15 reproduces the Report by the Reflection Group chaired by Mr Westendorp, which contains, among other proposals, those for including an explict commitment by member-States to protecting human rights in general and to non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in particular, in the European Treaties. I understand the full text of the Report will be made available shortly in at least the main EU languages through the "Europa" web server (URL: https://www.cec.lu/), but in the meanwhile I hope the following extract will be of interest and useful, especially in those member-States where the governments may be expected to oppose the explicit inclusion of such a commitment, and where ILGA member-Groups should therefore try to persuade them of the importance of accepting these proposals.
Extracts from the "Presidency Conclusions" of the Madrid European Council meeting, 15 and 16 December 1995, doc. SN400/95
(...)IV - Laying the foundations of the Europe of the Future
The Political Agenda for EuropeThe European Council identified the challenges which the member-States of the European Union must meet in order to prepare Europe for the 21st century. In the next five years, we must:
Success in all these tasks will mean that a large community enjoying the benefits of freedom, prosperity and stability can be set up Europe-wide.
- carry out adjustments to the Treaty on European Union;
- make the transition to a single currency in line with the timetable and conditions set;
- prepare for and carry out the enlargement negotiations with the associated countries of Central, Eastern and Southern Europe which have applied for membership;
- determine, in parallel, the financial perspective beyond 31 December 1999;
- actively continue the policy of dialogue, co-opera tion and association already under way with the Union's neighbouring countries, and in particular with Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and the Mediterranean countries.
The Intergovernmental Conference
- 1. The European Council received with great interest the Report of the Reflection Group chaired by Mr Westerndorp (Annex 15), which had been instructed by the European Council to prepare for the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference. It considers that the guidelines distilled within the Group, following a thorough analysis of the internal and external challenges facing the Union and the possible responses, constitute a sound basis for the work of the Conference.
- (...)
- 4. The Conference will meet regularly, in principle once a month, at the level of Foreign Affairs Ministers, who will have responsibility for all proceedings; preparations will be conducted by a working party made up from a representative of each Member-State's Minister for Foreign Affairs and of the President of the Commission. The Secretary-General of the Council will make the necessary arrangements to provide secretarial support for the Conference.
- 5. The European Parliament will be closely associated with the work of the Conference so that it is both briefed regularly and in detail on the progress of the discussions and can give its point of view, where it considers this to be necessary, on all matters under discussion. The detailed arrangements for such association will be determined by the Ministers for Foreign Affairs in line with the provisions which apply to the review of the Treaties.
- 6. The representatives of those countries of Central and Eastern Europe which have concluded Europe Agreements, and of Malta and Cyprus, will be briefed regularly on the progress of discussions and will be able to put their points of view at meetings with the Presidency of the European Union to be held, in principle, every two months. The European Economic Area and Switzerland will also be briefed.
Annex 15
A Strategy for Europe For six months, the members of the Reflection Group have been working on the European Council mandate to pave the way for the revision of the Treaty at the 1986 Conference and any other improvements in the Union's operation, in a spirit of openness and democracy. We feel it has been our task not only to establish an annotated agenda for the Conference but also to set in motion a process of public discussion and explanation regarding the thrust of the changes to be made.The Challenge
Men and women of Europe today, more than ever, feel the need for a common project. And yet, for a growing number of Europeans, the rationale for Community integration is not self-evident. This paradox is a first challenge.
When the European Communities were first established forty years ago, the need for a common design was clear because of Europe's failure over the first half of this century.
Now, almost half a century later, the successive enlargements of the Union, the expansion of its tasks, the very complexity of its nature and the magnitude of the problems of out times, make it very difficult to grasp the true significance of, and the continuing need for, European integration.
Let us accept that complexity is the price that Europe pays to protect our plural identity. But we firmly believe that this creation of Europe's political ingenuity, which cannot take the place of but is now an inseparable counterpart to the Union's member-States, from which its main political legitimacy flows, has been making an invaluable contribution of its own: peace and prosperity based on a definition of common interests and action that is the result not of power politics but of a common body of law agreed by all.
Today Europe has changed, partly because of the Union's success. All those European nations rediscovering their freedom wish to join, or to cooperate more closely with, the European Union. Yet in Western Europe, there is a growing sense of public disaffection despite the Union's contribution to an unprecedented period of peace and prosperity.
We therefore need to explain clearly to our citizens why the Union, which is so attractive to others in Europe, remains necessary for us too.
One reason is that the world outside Europe has also changed. Goods, capital and services nowadays flow globally in an increasingly competitive market. Prices are set world-wide. the prosperity of the Europe of today and tomorrow depends on its ability to succeed in the global marketplace.
The end of the Cold War may have increased the overall security of Europe. But it has also brought greater instability in Europe.
Furthermore, high levels of unemployment, external migratory pressures, increasing ecological imbalances and the growth of international organised crime have stimulated a public demand for greater security than can be satisfied by Member-States acting alone.
In an increasingly interdependent world, that reality poses new challenges and opens up new opportunities for the Union.
The Response
(...)
The Union cannot tackle all the steps in that European strategy at once, but it does not have any time to waste. The Heads of State or Government have personally taken responsibility for agreeing on a European agenda for carrying out this plan, which will only become a reality if it finds democratic backing from Europe's citizens.The 1996 Conference
The 1996 Conference is an important, but just a single, step in this process.
The Maastricht Treaty already foresees that a Conference should be convened in 1996 with a limited scope. This scope has subsequently been enlarged at various European Councils.
The Heads of Government have identified the need to make institutional reforms as a central issue of the Conference in order to improve the efficiency, democracy and transparency of the Union.
In that spirit, we have tried to identify the improvements needed to bring the Union up to date and to prepare it for the next enlargement.
We consider that the Conference should focus on necessary changes, without embarking on a compete revision of the Treaty.
Against this background, results should be achieved in three main areas:
- making Europe more relevant to its citizens
- enabling the Union to work better and preparing it for enlargements;
- giving the Union greater capacity for external action.
I. The citizen and the Union
The Union is not and does not want to be a super-state. Yet it is far more than a market. It is a unique design based on common values. We should strengthen these values, which all applicants for membership also want to share.
The Conference must also make the Union more relevant to its citizens. The right way for the Union to regain the commitment of its citizens is to focus on what needs to be done at European level to address the issues that matter to most of them such as greater security, solidarity, employment and the environment.
The Conference must also make the Union more transparent and closer to the citizens.
II. Promoting European values
Europe's internal security rests on its democratic values. As Europeans we are all citizens of democratic States which guarantee respect for human rights. Many of us think that the Treaty must clearly proclaim these common values.
Human rights already form part of the Union's general principles. For many of us they should, however, be more clearly guaranteed by the Union, through its accession to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The idea of a catalogue of rights has also been suggested, and a provision allowing for the possibility of sanctions or even suspending Union membership in the case of any State seriously violating human rights and democracy. Some of us take the view that national governments already provide adequate safeguards for these rights.
Many of us think it important that the Treaty should clearly proclaim such European values as equality between men and women, non-discrimination on grounds of race, religion, sexual orientation, age or disability and that it should include an express condemnation of racism and xenophobia and a procedure for its enforcement.
One of us believes that the rights and responsibilities we have as citizens are a matter for our nation-States: reaching beyond that could have the opposite effect to that intended.
Some of us also thought it worthwhile to examine the idea of establishing a Community service or European "peace corps" for humanitarian action, as an expression of Union solidarity; such a service could also be used in the event on natural disasters in the Union. Furthermore, some of us recommend that the Conference should examine how better to recognise in the Treaty the importance of access to public service utilities ("services publics d'interet general"). We believe that Europe also shares certain social values which are the foundation of our coexistence in peace and progress. Many of us take the view that the Social Agreement must become part of Union law. One of us believes that this would only serve to reduce competitiveness.
(...)
III. European Security and Defence Policy
(...)
Europe and democracy are inseparable concepts. To date, all the steps in the construction of Europe have been decided by common accord by the democratic governments of its member-States, have been ratified by the national Parliaments and have received popular support in our countries. This is also how we shall construct the future.We realise that this reflection exercise by the Group is only one step in a public debate initiated and guided by the European Council. We hope that this public and joint exercise between our nations will lead to renewed support for a project that is more than ever necessary for Europe today.
First Steffen Jensen reminded the wokshop on the tasks of OSCE and CoE working party:
Steffen Jensen infomred about the status of the NGO to CoE. ILGA applied for NGO status right after the Helsinke conference in 1994. CoE has not answered yet but the answer is expected to be positive. ILGA applied as a world organization but enclosed a list of only the European member organizations.
2. Re-introduction of the protocol to the Convention on Human Rights.
Steffen Jensen explained that an expert meeting in Copenhagen in 1990 made a draft protocol to the Convention on Human Rights. Shortly after 10 members of the parliamentary assembly signed a recommendation of the draft protocol.
Since then it has been impossible to get information about the status of the draft protocol. The workshop decided that members of working party should ask questions to their parliamentary members of the CoE about the status of the draft protocol.
Hein Verkerk promised to get the relevant information about members of the different committees of CoE and send it to the Euroletter.
Hein Verkerk made the point that if the CoE do not hurry up accepting the protocol the EU will be first by including discrimination based on sexual orientation in the EU treaty.
3. Rumania.
The situation in Rumania was described in the workshop "Gay situation in Rumania" Thursday. As promised Steffen Jensen had drafted a recommendation which was agreed upon.
4. Other CoE business.
Kurt Krickler informed that Macedonian has been accepted by the CoE and they still have a ban on homosexuality. Kurt Krickler is researching the situation in Macedonian and will send information to the Euroletter.
5. Report on the progress in OSCE.
Kurt Krickler told that there has only been a few relevant meetings in 1995 in OSCE.
A seminar took place in Bucharest about tolerance. It was not possible for members of the working party to participate but a statement was prepared. The statement was given by a Rumanian participant.
In a implementation meeting in Warsaw a written statement written by the working party was given to all delegations. Two delegations mentioned the issue but it was not mentioned in the final document.
Steffen Jensen told that the parliamentary assembly passed a resolution saying that sexual orientation should be recognised as an area of anti-discrimination.
The workshop discussed the future of OSCE. It seems that OSCE is less important than expected a few years ago. It was stressed that it is important for ILGA to be visible in international organizations.
6. The OSCE/CoE working party and Euroletter.
Steffen Jensen told about the work through Euroletter.
Hein Verkerk said that the working party is very happy about LBL continuing the work with producing the Euroletter.
Jackie Lewis suggested that information about the Euroletter and how to obtain it should be given in the ILGA bulletin.
This workshop made the following recommendations:
Minutes of the workshop on the European Union
Facilitator: Steffen Jensen
Participants from: Rumania, Denmark, Lithuania,
Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, Latvia, Sweden,
Spain, Switzerland
Agenda:
The Riga conference asks the EU working party to initiate lobbying for inclusion of an anti-discrimination law in the new treaty by
The group Egalite will send the following statements to all European ILGA members asking them to sign it and return it to Egalite. The statement was agreed upon at the Riga conference:
The European gay and lesbian organizations that has signed this statement demands that the follow-up treaty to the Maastricht treaty on the European Union includes an anti-discrimination clause covering sexual orientation.
Such a clause has been recommended by the European Parliament and is included in the conclusions that the Madrid-summit December 1995 saw as a proper basis for new treaty.
We find that an anti-discrimination clause is a precondition for
further measures that will enable equal treatment of all citizens of
the European Union.
Follow-up to the Riga Conference: tasks for ILGA member
groups
According to the decissions in Riga member groups in member states of
the Council of Europe are asked to:
Copyright ILGA,
1996
Copyright Gais et Lesbiennes Branchés,
1996
Page d'accueil