A Voice for the Voiceless

Courts Expand Gay Adoption in Germany, Austria

By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

KARLSRUHE, Germany – In a historic step, Germany’s highest court last week handed down a ruling which will strengthen gay couples’ adoption rights.  The same day, the European Court of Human Rights ruled against an Austrian policy that had denied certain adoption rights to gay couples.

Last Tuesday, High Courts in Europe handed down decisions expanding adoption rights of gay couples in Germany and Austria. (Photo Courtesy of Spiegel International)

The German Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to adopt the adopted or step-child of his or her registered partner, a practice known as successive adoption.  German laws allow for the adoption of a same-sex partner’s biological child, while a married heterosexual person can already adopt a partner’s adopted children.

Germany does not permit marriage between homosexual couples, but homosexuals have had the right to form civil partnerships since 2001.  The government has been accused of procrastinating on the issue of legalizing same-sex marriage when compared with other countries such as France and the United Kingdom, which are actively addressing the issue.  However, Chancellor Merkel’s spokesman said the government views the ruling “with great respect” and is in the process of considering how to comply with it.

Giving the government until June 2014 to amend the law in conformance with the ruling, the Court explained, “The exclusion of successive adoption by registered partners violates the general principle of equality.”

The Court further reasoned, “In marriage as in a civil partnership, adoption provides the child in the same way with legal security and material advantages in terms of care, support and inheritance law.”

However, the ruling stopped short of allowing same-sex couples to adopt children as a couple.  Much to the frustration of Germany’s main gay rights group, under the ruling, same-sex couples are restricted to adopting the same child on an individual basis.

The case was brought before the Court by a doctor from Münster who had been denied the right to adopt her long-term partner’s adopted Bulgarian daughter.

Volker Beck, an openly gay senior lawmaker with the opposition Green Party, greeted the ruling enthusiastically as “a breakthrough in equal treatment.”  He has announced that the Green Party will propose a draft law in the German Parliament to grant gay couples equal adoption rights with heterosexual couples, including tax breaks.

By contrast, an Austrian lesbian couple went all the way to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) to earn the right to jointly be recognized as the parents of one of the partner’s biological son.

While Austrian law allowed unmarried heterosexual couples to adopt the biological child of one’s partner, no such right was extended for homosexual couples.  The Austrian government argued before the Court that the purpose of its current law were to uphold a traditional family model.

However, the ECHR ruled against the Austrian government, finding its adoption legislation discriminated based on sexual orientation.  The court stated, “No convincing reasons had been advanced to show that such difference in treatment was necessary for the protection of the family or for the protection of the interests of the child.”

The court further asserted, “there is not just one way or one choice when it comes to leading one’s family or private life,” emphasizing that the government had failed to show that an LGBTI couple could not adequately provide for the needs of a child.

Martin K.I. Christensen, Co-Chair of the International Lesbian and Gay Association-Europe’s Executive Board said: “We hope that this judgment will pave the way towards the removal of the remaining legal barriers for [LGBTI] families in Europe.”

For further information, please see:

Amnesty International – Austria: Reform Needed After European Court Adoption Victory for Lesbian Couple – 19 February 2013

Huffington Post – Germany’s Gay Adoption Rights Strengthened By Court – 19 February 2013

Pink News – European Court of Human Rights Rules that Austria’s Adoption Laws Discriminated Against Lesbian Couple – 19 February 2013

Returns – German Court Expands Adoption Rights of Gay Couples – 19 February 2013

Spiegel International – Court Ruling: Germany Strengthens Gay Adoption Rights – 19 February 2013

Fighting Breaks Out in North Darfur, UN Expresses Concern

By Heba Girgis
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

KHARTOUM, Sudan—The United Nations today expressed its deep concern over the latest deadly tribal violence in the country’s Darfur region.

Arab militia kills 50 in Sudan’s North Darfur. (Photo Courtesy of Al Arabiya News)

According to the United Nations, more than 100 people have been killed and another 100,000 have been displaced from their homes because of the recent tribal warfare in Darfur. Residents said that the attackers wore uniforms and belonged to a militia of the Rezeigat tribe.

“They came in Land Cruisers, used Dushkas and they burned 30 houses, killing 53 people,” said a resident of El-Sireaf town, to which most of the 100,000 people displaced or severely affected by the earlier tribal fighting had fled.

Amnesty International said, “These events come as the government is attempting to exert greater control over licensing and export of gold, in a context of fiscal crisis, depleted foreign exchange reserves and widespread gold smuggling.”

The renewed fighting between two Arab tribes over mining rights left 60 people dead in the northern Darfur region. The country’s state news agency said that the fighting was the worst it has been since a cease-fire agreement was reached just last month. The agency noted that the fighting began when a group of armed tribesmen in vehicles and others riding camels attacked the El-Sireaf area of North Darfur.

The country’s western region of Darfur has been afflicted by tribal violence for almost 10 years now, since 2003, when rebels took up arms against the central government in the capital of Khartoum. Violence and fighting periodically erupt between tribes in that region.

The United Nation-African Union Mission in the region noted in a report last months that the deaths and displacement resulted from clashes between two tribes—Abbala and Beni Hussein. These clashes took placed in Jabel Amir, the site of several gold mines in the North Darfur state.

Governor Kbir said that security forces will “intervene strongly” to ensure peace between the two tribes. He further commented, saying that, “the government will review the humanitarian situation so as to let the NGOs do their job of delivering aid to affected people.”

The United Nations said that about 1.4 million people were already living in camps for the displaced before this most recent violent attack.

The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for the Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir for charges of masterminding war crimes in Darfur.

 

For further information, please see:

Global Post – UN Deeply Concerned by Darfur Tribal Fighting – 24 February 2013

Reuters – Fighting in Sudan’s Darfur Region Kills 51 – 24 February 2013

The Washington Post – Renewed Tribal Fighting Over Mining Rights – 24 February 2013

Al Arabiya – Arab Militia Kills 50 in Sudan’s Darfur – 23 February 2013

Zimbabwe Cracks Down on Radio Receivers

By Ryan Aliman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

HARARE, Zimbabwe – On Tuesday, the Zimbabwean police announced that the government is banning the possession of “specially designed radios” and similar communication devices.

Police spokesperson Charity Charamba claimed that NGO’s are using radios “to disseminate hate speech” against the administration. (Photo courtesy of The Zimbabwe Mail)

According to sources, the ban applies to devices such as small radio receivers and smart phones that tune into stations not linked to the country’s state broadcaster.

According to the police spokesperson Assistant Commissioner Charity Charamba, non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) and political parties are using these devices to spread “hate speech” against the administration that might influence the March referendum and elections this year.

“[These groups] have the intention to sow seeds of disharmony within the country especially now that the country is about to embark on the referendum and harmonized elections,” Charamba told journalists during last week’s press conference.

Media watchdog Misa-Zimbabwe condemned the ban, challenging its legality.

“It is an illegal ban to start with. There is no law which proscribes ownership and distribution of the receivers in the country,” asserted Misa-Zimbabwe director Nhlanhla Ngwenya.

Ngwenya described the prohibition as an “act of cowardice by people who feel threatened by the free flow of information.” He also suggested that it is the government’s way of blocking news and information from radio stations who have openly criticized the President and his administration.

Furthermore, Ngwenya said that the law was vague because it failed to specify which “communications devices” are banned and on what basis are they or their distribution deemed illegal.

“It is not clear as yet, on what basis possession of devices such as radios meant to receive broadcasting services can be deemed illegal. A reading of Section 38B of the Broadcasting Services Act states that one is not prohibited from possession of a receiver as long as it is in accordance with the terms and conditions of a listener’s license as issued by the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC),” Ngwenya explained.

“The importance of a radio set cannot be over-emphasised as it is a generally affordable gadget used for receiving information by the public. The right to receive and impart information and ideas is enshrined in Section 20 of the current constitution as a vital component of citizens’ right to freedom of expression,” he added.

Finally, Ngwenya said that Misa-Zimbabwe is currently working with other civil society groups to urge the government to repeal the prohibition. One of these groups, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR), indicated its intention to assail the law’s constitutionality in court.

“The lengths to which State institutions and actors are now going to deny fundamental rights and freedoms and act outside the law is alarming, but is typical of paranoid State authorities who are contemptuous of any diversity of opinion and information,” stated ZLHR in a recent press release.

 

For further information, please see:

All Africa – Zimbabwe: Ban On Radio Receivers Sparks Outcry – 24 February 2013

New Zimbabwe – Media groups slam police radio crackdown – 24 February 2013

Sunday Monitor – Zimbabwe police ban radios – 24 February 2013

The Zimbabwean – Media Alliance Zimbabwe condemns radio sets ban – 23 February 2013

News Day – Police under fire over radios – 21 February 2013

Constitutional Court Rules Against Rally Discrimination, Yet Assembly Restrictions Remain

By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

MOSCOW, Russia – Last week, Russia’s Constitutional Court, while upholding the constitutionality of law passed in June restricting protest and rally organization, ruled that authorities should not discriminate against rally organizers and participants on the basis of their political views.

Russia’s restrictive rally laws limit who can organize public protests, demonstrations, and meetings. (Photo Courtesy of RT)

The Constitutional Court approved of Russian laws banning individuals with multiple administrative convictions, which include a large number of citizens, from organizing rallies, reasoning that recurring violations “cast[] doubt on the organi[z]ational ability of such individuals and, most importantly, their ability to run a peaceful public event in a manner prescribed by law.”

Members of Parliament from the Other Russia political party had challenged law, which had become Federal Law No. 65-FZ as of June 8, 2012 (see Russia Parliament Approves Peaceful Assembly Fine, Bill Awaits Putin’s Approval).  They specifically believed Paragraph A in Part 1, Article 2 to be unconstitutional.  This paragraph denied the right to organize rallies, marches and pickets, to those with outstanding convictions for offences against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state, or offences against public safety, or those who have been charged with administrative offences.

Under the law, protest organizers cannot reject alternative routes that authorities propose without good reason, but are entitled to challenge the route decisions in court.  This provision was also upheld by the Court.

However, the Court stressed that authorities must apply the law equally with respect to all organizers and participants, regardless of political views.  The court stated, “Any response by a public authority to the organi[z]ation and running of meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and pickets must, in any case, be neutral, regardless of the political views of the organi[z]ers and participants.”

Nevertheless, the court recognized that even the minimum fines imposed by the rally law are disproportionate to the income of the Russian citizen.  Therefore, the Court order the legislator to take measures to lower the current fines.  Presently, the maximum fines stand at 300,000 roubles (~ $9,000) for individuals and 600,000 roubles (~ $20,000) for officials.

Even in light of the Court’s ruling, restrictions on meetings, rallies and protest continue to be seen throughout Russia.  In St. Petersburg, the city’s local assembly, or City Duma, this week adopted restrictions on public gatherings that will require such gatherings to have official permission and be at least 50 meters from government buildings, schools, hospitals, or police stations.

The adoption comes only a month after the bill was first introduced to the City Duma, when it was first refused in its original form.  The Yabloko Democratic Party, A Just Russia Party, Communist Party and even two members of the United Russia and Liberal Democratic Party questioned whether assembly would be possible in light of the bill.

“We’ll be left with nothing more than one-man pickets; you’ll be allowed to stand with a poster, and that’s all,” Alexander Kobrinsky, a Yabloko deputy, said.

Although the law makes special exceptions for lawmakers, religious ceremonies, sporting and cultural events, and for gatherings limited to less than 200 people in in specially designated areas, the ability to protest or demonstrate in a meaningful way and place is greatly curbed by the new law.

Yabloko leader Grigory Yavlinsky has called the law unconstitutional and promised to fight to repeal it.

The LGBT community in St. Petersburg has certainly seen the effects of tight restrictions on public rallies.  Under the June 8th law, authorities have the power to require the LGBT demonstrators move to the technical city limits to a tiny village called Novosyolki, after 15 sites the demonstration organizers suggested all were rejected because other events were taking place.

Natalya Tsymbalova, an activist with Democratic St. Petersburg and the Alliance of Straights for LGBT Equality, described the alternative location the city authorities had provided: “There is an aerodrome, a dump and a cemetery there. It looks like they have found the most remote location which is still officially part of the city.”

For further information, please see:

RFE/RL – St. Petersburg Tightly Restricts Public Gatherings – 20 February 2013

St. Petersburg Times – Gay Groups Continue to Fight Unfair Treatment – 20 February 2013

Human Rights in Russia – Constitutional Court Confirms Special Requirements for Rally Organisers – 14 February 2013

RT – Authorities Must Not Politically Discriminate Against Protesters – Constitutional Court – 14 February 2013

St. Petersburg Times – City Duma Rejects Call For Ban on Assemblies – 23 January 2013

China Acknowledges “Cancer Villages”

By Karen Diep
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China – After years of uncertainty regarding the effects of pollution, today, China’s Ministry of Environment Protection recognized the existence of “cancer villages.”

A child drinks water near a stream in Fuyuan County. (Photo Courtesy of RT News)

The latest report , “Guard against and control risks presented by chemicals to the environment during the 12th Five-Year period (2011-2015),” from the ministry outlined a crackdown on the use of 58 types of toxic chemicals.

According to a 2011 joint study by the ministry and the Chinese Academy of Engineering, over 90% of cities’ groundwater is polluted by varying degrees.  Furthermore, 64 out of 118 major cities possess gravely contaminated groundwater supplies.  Accordingly, it is important to note that 70% of China’s population is dependent upon groundwater as drinking water.

Although the report did not define the term “cancer village,” it shed light on other issues.  “The toxic chemicals have caused many environmental emergencies linked to water and air pollution,” read the report.  “There are even some serious cases of health and social problems like the emergence of cancer villages in individual regions,” continued the report.

According to BBC News, the widespread production and consumption of harmful chemicals forbidden in many developed nations still exist in China today.  Moreover, as China continues to experience speedy development, revelations pertaining to “cancer villages” have become more widespread.

A recent report by China Network Television deemed cancer as the country’s “top killer.”  Ma Jun, a reputable environmentalist in China, informed the Telegraph that despite China’s environmental issues and rising cancer rate, the Chinese government circumvents creating a connection between illness and pollution.

For many years, activists have believed that the cancer rates in some villages near factories and polluted waterways have increased.

In 2009, a Chinese journalist published a map finding dozens of ostensibly affected villages.  The journalist discovered high levels of poisonous heavy metals in the water and believed there was a direct correlation between occurrences of mining and cancer.

Last month, smog, which the World Health Organization considered hazardous, covered Beijing, among several other cities.  This pollution incited public uproar and debate about the costs of China’s speedy economic development.

For further information, please see:

BBC News – China acknowledges ‘cancer villages’ – 22 February 2013

Huffington Post – China Admits Existence of ‘Cancer Villages’ In Report, As Pollution Concerns Mount – 22 February 2013

RT News – China admits pollution brought about ‘cancer villages’ – 23 February 2013