Activists Consider Ukraine’s First LGBTI March Successful

By Ben Kopp
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

KYIV, Ukraine — Despite a ban issued by the city and upheld in court, LGBTI (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender, and Intersex) activists held Ukraine’s first gay rights march for forty minutes during the Kyiv Pride 2013 forum. And it appears that the police granted the activists protection.

Police remove Orthodox protestor who attempted to block Kyiv’s first gay pride event. (Photo Courtesy of Kyiv Post)

One organizer of the march, Stas Misthenko stated that the 2013 event was important to demonstrate possible change “[n]ot just in Ukraine, but for Russia, for Belarus, for Moldova.” Last year, organizers canceled their demonstration following both a statement that police could not guarantee protection for participants and the beating of an activist in broad daylight. Since then, one non-governmental organization (NGO) in Kyiv has received reports of twenty-nine violent attacks and thirty-six threats against LGBTI persons.

Recently, however, Ukraine has been under pressure to improve its human rights. For instance, the European Council established deadlines for Ukraine to demonstrate such progress by making judicial and electoral reforms, as well as releasing political prisoners. Also, the CEO of Amnesty International Ukraine, Tetiana Mazur declared, “The Ukrainian legislation doesn’t provide an adequate protection and sometimes violates the rights of [LGBT] people. Ukraine is unable to guarantee the protection of their principal freedoms. The right for freedom from the discrimination, the right to security of person, integrity and the right to freedom of assembly.”

Mazur also called for Ukraine to oppose legislation that would criminalize the “propaganda of homosexuality”, and instead promote legislation addressing LGBTI discrimination. According to Misthenko, the vast majority of LGBTI people hide their sexual identities for fear of being beaten in the streets or fired from their jobs.

Several right-wing and religious groups in Ukraine threatened that, if held, this year’s march would result in violence. Archpriest Greorgy Kovalenko of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church explained that rather than a chance to defend rights, the Equality March “was propaganda for sin and sodomy.”

On May 21, 2013, Kyiv officials sought to bar events from the city center on May 25 not linked to the Kyiv City Day celebration, including the Equality March. The Kyiv city administration stated that in light of several applications for rallies supporting opposing views, the government was “obliged to take the necessary measures to ensure public order and protect people’s lives and safety.”

To prevent violence, a court in Ukraine upheld the ban on March 23.

Nevertheless, on March 25, 2013, the Equality March took place amidst strong police presence. Reports indicate that over one hundred pro-LGBTI activists were present. While demonstrators marched on Victory Avenue, Orthodox Christians denounced them by shouting slogans. One slogan included: “Ukraine is not America. Kyiv is not Sodom.”

After police detained thirteen persons protesting against gay rights, improvement appears very likely for Ukraine’s human rights.

For further information, please see:

Kyiv Post: Police Detain about ten Opponents of Equality March in Kyiv — 25 May 2013

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty — Gay Pride Activists Briefly March in Kyiv — 25 May 2013

Reuters — Ukraine’s First Gay March Held under Police Protection — 25 May 2013

EuroNews — Kiev Court Cites Security Reasons for Banning Gay Pride Rally — 24 May 2013

Interfax Ukraine — Organizers Try to Hold Gay Pride Parade in Kyiv on May 25 Despite Court Ban — 24 May 2013

Amnesty International — Ukraine: Kyiv Authorities in Shameful About-Face on Pride March — 23 May 2013

Human Rights Watch — Ukraine: Allow Equality March, Protect Participants — 23 May 2013

National Radio Company of Ukraine — Court Bans LGBT Equality March in Kyiv on May 25 — 23 May 2013

Reuters — Ukranian Court Bars Gay Pride Event, Citing Security Concerns — 23 May 2013

Guardian — Ukraine Gay Pride Marchers Ready to Defy Violence — 18 May 2013

Kyiv Post — Amnesty International Urging Ukraine to Adopt Laws to Combat Discrimination against LGBT People — 17 May 2013

Brazil Follows Uruguay And Effectively Approves Gay Marriage

By Brendan Oliver Bergh
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

BRASILIA, Brazil – 2013 has certainly been a telling time for same-sex relations. While some misguided Catholics appreciated that the Pope approved of same-sex unions, the real story comes from the approval of same-sex marriages in Latin America.  Authorities in Brazil have effectively legalized same-sex marriage, following Argentina and Uruguay in providing equal rights to couples.

Brazil’s National Council of Justice have issued a ruling allowing any couple in Brazil to seek a marriage without a judges consent. (Photo Courtesy of BBC)

Brazil’s National Council of Justice, a panel which oversees the legal system and headed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court announced a resolution on May 14, 2013, stating that notary publics who preform marriage ceremonies cannot refuse to preform same-sex ceremonies. Having been debating this issue after a 2011 Supreme Court ruling they announced that there was no reason for the government to wait for congress to pick up the slack and pass a law extending gay couples rights they already technically and legally have. After this ruling, if a notary public officer rejects the signing of a gay marriage, he could face sanctions. Same-sex civil unions have already been authorized in the country, and this would allow same-sex unions to be converted into marriages, allowing them the same protections that already benefit heterosexual marriages in the predominantly Roman-Catholic nation. From now on, couples in all 27 states will no longer need to petition a judge in order to receive a marriage license, and that includes Brazil’s estimated 60,000 gay couples.

The 2011 ruling recognized stable homosexual unions and that the Brazilian constitution granted them the rights. Chief Justice Barbosa, chief justice of the Supreme Court called it binding, and announced that the lower courts should follow it. However a strong religious faction in congress opposes same-sex marriage and has yet to approve any laws which would support same-sex marriage reform and regulations. Citing judicial activism, Marco Feliciano of the Social Christian Party stated “it’s something most Brazilians do not want” as well that the decisions was “unconstitutional.” Congressman Feliciano, an outspoken opponent of gay rights has called AIDS a “gay cancer.” A week later on May 22, the conservative party appealed the council’s decision to the Supreme Court.

Perhaps bowing down the Brazilian resolution. 4 days later French President Francois Hollande signed into law a bill authorizing marriage and adoption by same-sex couples.

For more information please see:

On Top Magazine – Conservative Leader In Brazil Challenge De Facto Gay Marriage Ruling – 22 May 2013

Telegraph – Brazil Judicial Decision Paves The Way For Same-Sex Marriage – 15 May 2013

New York Times – Brazilian Court Council Removes A Barrier To Same-Sex Marriage – 14 May 2013

BBC – Brazil Judicial Decision Paves Way For Gay Marriage – 14 May 2013

Standard Digital – Brazil Paves Way For Gay Marriage – 10 May 2013

Syrian Judges to Hold Unity Conference in Turkey

Defected Members of the Judiciary Will Plan Comprehensive Law Code For Liberated Areas

Istanbul, Turkey – On May 1 and 2, 2013, the Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies (SCPSS) hosted the Syrian Expert House, a gathering of Syrian academics, human rights activists, members of the political opposition, and professionals in Istanbul, Turkey to conduct a workshop on Constitutional Reform and Rule of Law in Syria. After two days of intense discussions, the Syrian Expert House concluded its meeting with specific collective recommendations for establishing rule of law and achieving constitutional legitimacy in the post-Assad interim period.

Workshop participants discussed a number pressing concerns regarding judicial affairs in Syria, most notably the status of the judiciary in the liberated areas and the challenges these courts face. Additionally, participants discussed how to achieve constitutional legitimacy after the fall of the Assad regime and unanimously decided that a return to the Constitution of 1950, without modification, would be the ideal solution for achieving this legitimacy. The 1950 Constitution is the only constitution in Syrian history that was drafted and approved by a Constitutional Assembly. It also has received popular support, despite the presence of some controversial articles regarding minorities and freedom of expression. However, in the absence of an entity with the legal authority to amend the constitution, the Syrian Expert House recommended that the 1950 constitution be accepted wholesale initially, with the expectation that amendments to the document would be the first order of business of a future Constitutional Assembly.

The participants recommended that the transitional interim government, formed immediately after the fall of the regime, set a date for popular elections to choose members of the Constitutional Assembly, which, in addition to amending the 1950 constitution, will be in charge of the formulation of a new Syrian constitution. The Syrian Expert House also identified steps for ensuring the independence of the judiciary through mechanisms and precise standards to protect the judiciary from executive interference in its decisions and in its structure. The “Judicial Authority Law,” which grants excessive power to the Syrian judiciary, was also discussed and it was unanimously agreed that this portion of the Syrian law code is not conducive to an independent and sound legal environment in Syria.

On the second day of the workshop, participants discussed the rule of law and legal protection during the transitional phase. Participants agreed to prepare a general conference for uniting all the defected judges and lawyers currently living in liberated areas or abroad into one national judicial body that would uphold one unified national transitional law code. The participants also formed a preparatory committee for this conference made up of eight members:

Dr. Radwan Ziadeh (Executive Director, Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies)

Judge Marwan Kea’yed (Unified Judicial Council)

Judge Ziad Al-Basha (Independent Judicial Council)

Judge Iman Shahoud (Independent Judicial Council)

Lawyer Mazen Jouma’a (Liberal Lawyers of Aleppo)

Lawyer Haitham al-Maleh (Head of the Judicial Office of the National Coalition)

Lawyer Mohammed Obaid (Legal adviser to the interim government and the National Coalition)

Lawyer Mohammed Sabra (Legal adviser to the interim government and the National Coalition)

Participants also discussed the most important laws that should be repealed or amended in the future transitional phase and at the same time warned judges about the pitfalls of interfering in the legislative process. The participants also discussed the importance of transitional justice in Syria and studied the mechanisms established by the National Preparatory Committee for Transitional Justice last month.

The president in charge of the formation of the interim government, Mr. Ghassan Hitto, visited the members of the workshop and received a briefing on their work and the challenges and difficulties faced by the judiciary. Mr. Hitto promised that the independence of the judiciary would be a priority of his government. He also urged the participants to continue to make efforts in order to achieve the aspirations of the Syrian people.

This workshop was the first of five workshops organized by the Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies on behalf of the Syrian Expert House. Thematic topics of the five workshops included: constitutional and legal reform, political and administrative reform, electoral reform, security sector reform, and economic reform. The results of these workshops will be submitted in a general conference held by the Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies and the Syrian Expert House in July.

Members of the Syrian Expert House first met in October 2012  in Istanbul, Turkey at a conference widely regarded as the most inclusive gathering of the Syrian opposition to date. The Syrian Expert House was established by the Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies for producing thoroughly Syrian research outputs on the post-Assad political transition process in Syria. The Syrian Expert House will lay the necessary groundwork for promoting considered and deliberate reforms following the end of the Syrian conflict.

Prepared by the Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies

Interpol Rejects Russia’s Politically Motivated Warrant and Rules in Favour of William Browder

Press Release

24 May 2013 – Interpol has rejected Russia’s attempt to misuse Interpol systems against William Browder, the leader of the worldwide campaign for justice for Sergei Magnitsky, by deleting its request from the Interpol’s channels.

“The decision by Interpol to delete the Russian “all points bulletin” for William Browder from the Interpol system is a clear sign that a deeply corrupt regime will not be allowed to freely persecute whistle-blowers who have exposed it. We hope that one day those responsible for Sergei Magnisky’s torture and murder will be brought to justice, with help from Interpol,” said a Hermitage Capital representative.

Interpol’s General Secretariat has now deleted the request from the Russian authorities seeking to “locate” Mr Browder in order to detain him on a Russian arrest warrant.

In its decision, Interpol’s General Secretariat has followed the recommendation from Interpol’s Commission for the Control of Files, who has found the Russian request to have a “predominant political character.” Interpol’s Commission for the Control of Files is responsible for the observance by Interpol and its entities of Interpol’s Constitution and data processing rules. Under Article 3 of the Interpol’s Constitution, any improper use of Interpol systems for political purposes is strictly prohibited.

The decision by the Interpol’s Commission for the Control of Files was issued during its 86th session held in Lyon on 23-24 May 2013.

On Monday, 27 May 2013, Mr Browder will continue his campaign for Magnitsky sanctions in Europe at the ‘Time for European Magnitsky Law’ event organised in Berlin within framework of the Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy & Human Rights 2013 (www.bhrc.de), on the invitation of the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy and member of the European Parliament, Kristiina Ojuland. The Magnitsky campaign calls for visa sanctions and asset freezes on Russian officials involved in the false arrest, torture and killing of Sergei Magnitsky, and the $230 million corruption he had exposed. The law imposing such sanctions has already been adopted in the United States, and 16 Russian officials have been sanctioned by the U.S. Government.

For further information, please see:

Law and Order in Russia