Database

Our article is about the new relevance of the category of “the homosexual” in immigration policies. This novelty is paradoxical: while homosexuality had previously been defined exclusively in negative terms, from the point of view of the State, it has now assumed a positive value in the West—since it can be invoked to justify asylum seeking. The argument has two prongs. On the one hand, taking homosexuality into account for immigration control implies a definition of gay identity. On the other, the objects of these policies are also subjects: their own identity is caught up in this transnational process of identification. Fieldwork for this article was conducted in France on bi-national same-sex couples. However, the new categorization of homosexuality extends far beyond—in Europe and throughout the world. We argue that the politics of identity are not just, and not primarily about identity politics; they have to do both with politics in general and policies in particular.

In Europe, refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants are more vulnerable to sexual victimisation than European citizens. They face more challenges when seeking care. This literature review examines how legal and policy frameworks at national, European and international levels condition the prevention of and response to sexual violence affecting these vulnerable migrant communities living in the European Union (EU). Applying the Critical Interpretive Synthesis method, we reviewed 187 legal and policy documents and 80 peer-reviewed articles on migrant sexual health for elements on sexual violence and further analysed the 37 legal and 12 peer-reviewed articles among them that specifically focused on sexual violence in vulnerable migrants in the EU-27 States. Legal and policy documents dealing with sexual violence, particularly but not exclusively in vulnerable migrants, apply ‘tunnel vision’. They ignore: a) frequently occurring types of sexual violence, b) victimisation rates across genders and c) specific risk factors within the EU such as migrants’ legal status, gender orientation and living conditions. The current EU policy-making paradigm relegates sexual violence in vulnerable migrants as an ‘outsider’ and ‘female only’ issue while EU migration and asylum policies reinforce its invisibility. Effective response must be guided by participatory rights- and evidence-based policies and a public health approach, acknowledging the occurrence and multiplicity of sexual victimisation of vulnerable migrants of all genders within EU borders.

Over the past few years, the rise of restrictions on religious freedom, and the denial of fundamental rights to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex people (LGBTI) minorities in many parts of the world have resulted in an increased number of the asylum requests in many European countries. This article compares and contrasts the approaches of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union, highlighting common approaches and divergences. Part I serves as an introduction to the topic. Part II discusses recent developments in the case law concerning the persecution of religious minorities. Part III discusses recent developments concerning the persecution of LGBTI communities. Part IV highlights the common trends, key notions and legal uncertainties of the two sets of decisions. Finally, part V five offers some concluding remarks.

 

Storytelling serves as a vital resource for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans* (LGBT) refugees’ access to asylum. It is through telling their personal stories to the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board that LGBT refugees’ claims for asylum are accessed and granted. Storytelling also serves as a mechanism for LGBT refugees to speak about social injustice within and outside of Canada. In this article, I explore the challenges of storytelling and social justice as an activist and scholar. I focus on three contexts where justice and injustice interplay in LGBT refugee storytelling: the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board, public advocacy around anti-queer violence and refugee rights, and oral history research. I describe how in each arena storytelling can be a powerful tool of justice for LGBT refugees to validate their truths and bring their voices to the forefront in confronting state and public violence. I investigate how these areas can also inflict their own injustices on LGBT refugees by silencing their voices and reproducing power hierarchies.

Sexuality-based refugee claims constitute an expanding area of legal practice and scholarship. This expansion in the field of refugee law mirrors international efforts to address homophobia in various sites around the globe, and in legal terms, this has predominantly taken the form of rights-based protections, such as decriminalising same-sex sexual acts as a matter of civil and political rights. The strategies of addressing sex-, gender- and sexuality-based oppression in the context of free movement on one hand and constitutional protections on the other share a common set of tensions and dilemmas, and both risk re-inscribing fundamental aspects of the very violence that they each seek to address. This article asks what it might mean to “queer” refugee law, particularly in the context of its dynamic relationship with the discourse of decriminalisation. The article takes forward the centrality of sexual politics within the moral economy of migration regulation and attempts to approach it with the methodological impulse and transformative potential that “queer” suggests.

Each year, thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) asylum seekers apply for asylum in EU Member States.This book considers the position of LGBTI asylum seekers in European asylum law. Developing an encompassing approach to the topic, the book identifies and analyzes the main legal issues arising in relation to LGBTI people seeking asylum including: the underestimation of the relevance of criminalization of sexual orientation as well as the large scale violence against trans people in countries of origin by some European states; the requirement to seek State protection against violence even when they originate from countries where sexual orientation or gender identity is criminalized, or where the authorities are homophobic; the particular hurdles faced during credibility assessment on account of persisting stereotypes; and queer families and refugee law.

The book gives a state of the art overview of law in Europe, both at the level of European legislation and at the level of Member State practice. While being largely focused on Europe, the book also takes into account asylum decisions from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States and is of relevance internationally, offering analysis of issues which are not specific to particular legal systems.

This study tackles the question how state development cooperation can work on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) in countries where these issues are criminalized and where Lesbians, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Inter persons (LGBTI) are socially stigmatized. The study starts with an analysis of the human rights obligations relating to sexual orientation and gender identity and how they relate to development cooperation. It then addresses how working on sexual orientation and gender identity furthers the global devel–opment agenda of poverty reduction. A subsequent chapter illustrates how LGBTI activists work and the conditions they face. This includes the way human rights are understood and framed in their respective countries. The study argues that development cooperation has to take this into account in order not to generate negative consequences for LGBTI activism and activists. The study then explores how different aspects of state development cooperation – such as aid cuts, pro–gramme design, modes of aid delivery and internal staff policies – may promote or endanger work on sex–ual orientation and gender identity. Last but not least, the study points to those areas where development cooperation has still not considered or reached LGBTI groups. To close the analysis, interviews with LGBTI activists demonstrate that the Universal Periodic Review and the work of National Human Rights Institutions have potential of promoting SOGI human rights.

Some legal scholars have asserted that rigid notions of homosexual identity shape adjudicators’ approach when evaluating asylum claims based on sexual orientation. Recent ethnographic research at the French Court of Asylum, in charge of reviewing appeals on decisions from the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons, shows indeed that adjudication is based on particular gender stereotypes. However, my analysis centers on an unexplored but related issue: the relationship between the problems raised by adjudicators when facing what they call “intimacy cases,” specifically regarding the administration of proof and stereotyped performances. Through ethnographic data drawn from encounters with adjudicators and asylum seekers at the French Court of Asylum; through interviews with judges, rapporteurs (reporters), interpreters, and lawyers; and by examining 60 court rulings, I argue that sexual orientation-based cases crystallize the importance of intimacy in the politics of asylum, helping to seize the new shapes of the refugee as well as the growing difficulties for judges in relying on material evidence.

Abkommen über die Rechtsstellung der Flüchtlinge vom 28. Juli 1951 (In Kraft getreten am 22. April 1954)

Protokoll über die Rechtsstellung der Flüchtlinge vom 31. Januar 1967(In Kraft getreten am 4. Oktober 1967)