No Such Thing as Acceptable Sexual Orientation Change Efforts: An International Human Rights Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Sonia Boulos ◽  
César González-Cantón
2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 176-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignatius Yordan Nugraha

Sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) have been promoted aggressively under the belief that homosexuality is a curable disease. However, scientific research has shown that such practice can cause detrimental effects such as self-loathing, depression and even suicidal urges. It has also revealed that homosexuality is a mere variation of human sexuality and dispelled the myth that it is a ‘contagious disease’. This raises some concerns that the practice of SOCE could amount to human rights violations, and thus this article shall tackle the issue of whether such practice is compatible with international human rights law. Given that children have been identified as a group that is particularly vulnerable to SOCE, this article shall commence by scrutinising whether there is an obligation to ban SOCE for minors under the jurisprudence of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. This article shall then proceed to the question of whether a similar obligation is also applicable to SOCE for adults through the application of the right not to be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 359-378
Author(s):  
Carmelo Danisi

In the last decades, international refugee law (‘IRL’) and international human rights law (‘IHRL’) have increasingly taken into account sexual minorities’ needs. Despite not being one of the grounds of persecution under the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees, sexual orientation has been identified as a relevant factor for the recognition of refugee status for more than twenty years. In parallel, IHRL has evolved to a point where sexual minorities are more fully included within the scope of rights and freedoms set forth in universal and regional human rights treaties, especially via the prohibition of discrimination. Yet, strange as it may seem, this simultaneous evolution has not always led to a fruitful intersection between IRL and IHRL, even in terms of interpretation despite what the Law of Treaties requires. Drawing from documentary and qualitative data and by taking people fleeing homophobia as example, this article looks at the role that IHRL may play in complementing and in intersection with IRL. It argues that IHRL may, firstly, raise obligations to facilitate the access of these claimants to asylum determination procedures and, secondly, inform the notion of persecution used in IRL more comprehensively than it currently does in practice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 122-145
Author(s):  
Malte Breiding Hansen

Since 2003, the United Nations international human rights framework has moved notably toward increased international human rights recognition for sexual and gender minorities. Most recently, 2016 saw the adoption of an Independent Expert on violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Motivated by the nevertheless continued refusal by predominantly African and Middle Eastern countries to recognize any such human rights application, as well as postcolonial critiques of counterproductive moral imperialism and homonationalist strategies by proponent member States, this article asks how dynamics of member State disputes in the UN debates on SOGI-based rights may point to restraints and possibilities for achieving global human rights recognition for culturally diverse sexual and gender minorities. The article demonstrates how interand intradiscursive rules of formation in UN member State debates predicated on either universal or culturally relative readings of international human rights law reproduce normative polarization and obstruct national implementation of human rights protection for sexual and gender minorities. The article therefore finds universality truth claims to restrain transformative change, as well as represent a possibility for achieving human rights recognition through “perverse,” reiterations of the parameters of the universal, wielded from an open-ended multiplicity of sexual and gender minority expressions and articulations. A radical politics of top-down and bottom-up cultural translation is suggested as a possible strategy for human rights recognition for culturally diverse sexual and gender minorities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document