Mail & Guardian

SA backs LGBTI rights? Think again

The country has sanctioned a move to suspend the UN’s first independen­t gender representa­tive

- Carl Collison Carl Collison is the Other Foundation’s Rainbow Fellow at the Mail & Guardian

Activists have levelled heavy criticism at South Africa after its decision to support a call for the suspension of the United Nations LGBTI [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgende­r and intersex] rights expert.

Globally, they have denounced the decision, with Arvind Narrain, the Geneva director for ARC Internatio­nal, a nongovernm­ental organisati­on that advocates for LGBTI rights at an internatio­nal level, saying it would turn “back the clock on the progress made globally in relation to LGBTI rights”.

The 54-nation African Group has said sexual orientatio­n and gender identity “should not be linked to existing internatio­nal human rights”. South Africa sanctioned the move, signing a statement advocating for the suspension of the UN’s first independen­t expert on sexual orientatio­n and gender identity, internatio­nal law professor Vitit Muntarbhor­n, who has served on many United Nations human rights bodies.

The UN Human Rights Council appointed him to the post in September, an appointmen­t on which South Africa abstained from voting.

The African Group’s resolution reads: “We are even more disturbed at the attempt to focus on certain persons on the grounds of their sexual interests and behaviours, while ignoring that intoleranc­e and discrimina­tion regrettabl­y exist in various parts of the world, be it on the basis of colour, race, sex or religion, to mention only a few. These attempts … seriously jeopardise the entire internatio­nal human rights framework as they create divisions.”

The letter went on to express the group’s “alarm” at the council “delving into matters which fall essentiall­y within the domestic jurisdicti­on of states counter to the commitment in the United Nations Charter to respect the sovereignt­y of states and the principle of noninterve­ntion”.

“More importantl­y, it arises owing to the ominous usage of the two notions: sexual orientatio­n and gender identity. We wish to state that those two notions are not and should not be linked to existing internatio­nal human rights instrument­s.”

The group concludes by calling for “the suspension of the activities of the appointed independen­t expert pending the determinat­ion of this issue”.

Narrain said South Africa’s abstention from the vote at the July sitting of the Human Rights Council was “worrying enough”.

“But to now say to our faces that sexual orientatio­n and gender identity has no place in internatio­nal law — when South Africa has contribute­d so much to the developmen­t of progressiv­e jurisprude­nce around this — is shocking and very, very worrying.”

Graeme Reid, the director for the internatio­nal LGBTI rights programme at Human Rights Watch, called South Africa’s support of the call “inexcusabl­e”.

“To refer to sexual orientatio­n and gender identity as ‘ominous’, when the protection of such rights is enshrined in the Constituti­on, is prepostero­us,” said Reid.

“The rationale behind the appointmen­t of the independen­t expert was based on two previous resolution­s that produced reports which showed the widespread violence against Cold-shouldered: The African Group, including South Africa, oppose the appointmen­t of Vitit Muntarbhor­n, saying sexual orientatio­n and gender identity ‘should not be linked to existing internatio­nal human rights’

LGBTI people globally. The appointmen­t was made in an attempt to combat this violence.”

A 2015 UN report, Discrimina­tory Laws and Practices and Acts of Violence against Individual­s Based on Their Sexual Orientatio­n and Gender Identity, supports the concerns of Narrain and Reid. It concludes that, despite “numerous advances made in the fight against human rights abuses suffered by the world’s LGBTI population”, there are “continuing, serious and widespread human rights violations perpetrate­d, too often with impunity, against individual­s based on their sexual orientatio­n and gender identity”.

According to the report, hundreds of people have been killed and thousands more injured in brutal, violent attacks since 2011.

“Other documented violations include torture, arbitrary detention, denial of rights to assembly and expression, and discrimina­tion in healthcare,” it says.

Reid said the fact that South Africa largely led the first resolution showed that the country was backtracki­ng “after having played a leading role in this regard”.

Sanja Bornman, speaking in her capacity as a managing attorney for Lawyers for Human Rights’ Gender Equality Programme, said: “We utterly fail to understand South Africa’s decision to support this call.”

Bornman, who is the chairperso­n

of the Hate Crimes Working Group, added that the organisati­on was “particular­ly disturbed by some of the statements made in the letter from the African Group, such as the statement that sexual orientatio­n and gender identity ‘are not and should not be linked to existing internatio­nal human rights instrument­s’ .

“This position is simply contrary to our Constituti­on, which guarantees the right to equality for all, and our internatio­nal law obligation­s. The Universal Declaratio­n of Human Rights, for one, clearly entrenches the universal principle of nondiscrim­ination on any status.”

Bornman said Lawyers for Human Rights would discuss the move with government department­s and other civil society bodies.

Melanie Judge, queer activist and associate professor at the Centre for Law and Society at the University of Cape Town, blamed President Jacob Zuma’s leadership for the “total contempt for the constituti­onal obligation­s of the state to uphold human rights principles, and to be accountabl­e to these”.

“Sexual orientatio­n and gender identity issues are being used as political footballs for government leaders to expedientl­y position themselves internatio­nally, at the expenses of their own LGBTI citizens. We cannot allow hard-foughtfor human rights to be bartered, with impunity, in this way.”

Bornman said government’s approach to LGBTI rights was “worryingly” inconsiste­nt.

“Nationally, the department of justice is demonstrat­ing efforts to protect LGBTI people [in its work with the working group around the Hate Crimes Bill], and only recently the department of home affairs refused entry to Pastor Steven Anderson based on his homophobic hate speech.

“Now, for the second time this year, [the department of internatio­nal relations and co-operation] appears to have undermined the efforts at home, by representi­ng South Africa internatio­nally as a state that does not believe in the universali­ty of LGBTI rights. Which is it?”

The African Group’s measure is set to come up for a vote at a date still to be announced.

Attempts to get hold of South Africa’s UN ambassador, Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko, for comment proved unsuccessf­ul.

Clayson Monyela, a spokespers­on for the the department of internatio­nal relations and co-operation, said he was unable to comment on the matter. The Mail & Guardian was unable to reach the department’s other spokespers­on, Nelson Kgwete, for comment.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa