24 January 2023
The many troubles of the Fedotova judgment
On 17 January 2023, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled in Fedotova v Russia that the absence of any legal recognition and protection for same-sex couples amounts to a violation of Art. 8 of the Convention. For 30 Member States of the Council of Europe (CoE), this judgment changes nothing since their legal orders already allow same-sex couples to enter into marriage or into other forms of legally recognised relationships. For the remaining countries, however, the Fedotova judgment amounts to an external judicial pressure to change their legal landscape in a politically very sensitive area of LGBT+ rights. Fedotova is probably the most political judgment of all times. Continue reading >>
0 
17 December 2021
Verwandtschaft zum Zwecke der Freizügigkeit
In einem aktuellen Urteil behandelt der EuGH die Situation von Regenbogenfamilien, die in manchen Mitgliedstaaten rechtlich nicht anerkannt werden. Obwohl die EU für das Familienrecht keine Kompetenz hat, gelingt es dem Gerichtshof zumindest im Bereich der Freizügigkeit Diskriminierungen abzubauen. Ob seine Vorgaben auch umgesetzt werden, steht auf einem anderen Blatt. Denn, glaubt man den Mitgliedstaaten, steht nicht weniger auf dem Spiel als ihre „nationale Identität“. Continue reading >>09 December 2021
India’s Dynamic Constitution
A set of petitions challenging India’s non-recognition of gay and transgender persons’ right to marry was listed for final hearing by the Delhi High Court on 30 November 2021, with notice subsequently having been issued to the Union Government. I argue that the Indian constitutional framework is sufficiently well-developed to recognise LGBT marriage and that in holding as much, judicial fora in India would be heavily influenced by the idea of “constitutional morality”. Continue reading >>
0
05 November 2021
Value Judgments
On 26 October 2021, the Bulgarian Constitutional Court issued a binding interpretative decision on the definition of the concept of “sex”. The Court held that “sex” can only have a binary biological meaning. Instead of engaging in a legal debate in relation to the discussed matter, the Constitutional Court chose to interpret the law through “values established in the society” that are derived from “other normative systems, such as religion, morality and custom”. The result is a judgment which not only neglects the rights and freedoms of transgender people, but also relies on a reasoning that could undermine women’s rights. Continue reading >>
0
19 July 2021
All Eyes on LGBTQI Rights
In Fedotova v Russia, the ECtHR found that Russia overstepped the boundaries of its otherwise broad margin of appreciation because it had “no legal framework capable of protecting the applicants’ relationships as same-sex couples has been available under domestic law”. The case foreshadows a future wherein the familiar line of cases advancing the protection of same sex couples will need to be complemented by a jurisprudence that engages with the backslash against LGBTQI rights. Continue reading >>
0
16 July 2021
Will Russia Yield to the ECtHR?
On 13 July 2021, the European Court of Human Rights published its judgment in Fedotova and Others v. Russia, a case which concerned the lack of legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the Russian legal system. The judges found the Russian laws to be in violation of Article 8 – the right to respect for private and family life and Article 14 – prohibition of discrimination. However, it is highly unlikely that Russia will enforce the judgment. Continue reading >>25 June 2021
Attack on the Rights of LGBTQIA+ People in Hungary: Not Just Words, but Deeds as Well?
On 15 June, the Hungarian parliament voted by an overwhelming majority to pass legislation that, in essence, and under the pretext of protecting minors, bans images or content that depicts or ‘promotes’ homosexuality or trans-identity from the public space. The new law adds to a long list of measures already adopted by Hungary over the past several years, that also have the objective of discriminating and stigmatising the LGBTQIA+ population. These measures moreover are part of a wider context of deliberate erosion of liberal democracy in Hungary. The European Union's toolbox reveals its limits here. Why, therefore, not turn to the Council of Europe, with its European Convention on Human Rights and European Court of Human Rights? Continue reading >>02 February 2021
Defining the Modern Family
In November 2020, the Constitutional Court of Latvia recognised that the Constitution of Latvia (Satversme) obliges the state to protect all families, including those established by same-sex couples. The judgement was met with considerable political backlash and at the beginning of January prompted the right‑wing party Nacionālā Apvienība to submit an initiative to amend the Satversme with a new, excluding definition of family. Perhaps more worrisome is how the amendment and the associated campaign openly attack the authority of the Constitutional Court. Continue reading >>18 November 2020
A New Chapter in the Hungarian Government’s Crusade Against LGBTQI People
On 10 November 2020 - the same day the Hungarian National Assembly authorized the Government to rule by decree for 90 days in the state of danger - the Minister of Justice submitted a whole package of legislative reforms. Among them, the Ninth Amendment to the Fundamental Law of Hungary. Two proposed amendments would directly detrimentally affect the rights of the LGBTQI community, which, we argue, would make it extremely difficult to deconstruct the institutionalized trans- and homophobia which the government has been further entrenching for years. Continue reading >>26 August 2020
Fencing Off the Difference
Public statements of high-ranking politicians expressing hostility towards and disdain of sexual minorities have become common in the recent years in Poland. But the problem of “LGBT-Free Zones” has given the topic a new constitutional quality. Continue reading >>
0