The IGLHRC issued a statement on Nov 17, 2010:
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) and ARC International are deeply disappointed with yesterday’s vote in the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly to remove a reference to sexual orientation from a resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. The resolution urges States to protect the right to life of all people, including by calling on states to investigate killings based on discriminatory grounds. For the past 10 years, the resolution has included sexual orientation in the list of discriminatory grounds on which killings are often based.
The removed reference was originally contained in a non-exhaustive list in the resolution highlighting the many groups of people that are particularly targeted by killings - including persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, persons acting as human rights defenders (such as lawyers, journalists or demonstrators) as well as street children and members of indigenous communities. Mentioning sexual orientation as a basis on which people are targeted for killing highlights a situation in which particular vigilance is required in order for all people to be afforded equal protection.
The amendment removing the reference to sexual orientation was sponsored by Benin on behalf of the African Group in the UN General Assembly and was adopted with 79 votes in favor, 70 against, 17 abstentions and 26 absent.
"This vote is a dangerous and disturbing development,” said Cary Alan Johnson, Executive Director of IGLHRC. “It essentially removes the important recognition of the particular vulnerability faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people - a recognition that is crucial at a time when 76 countries around the world criminalize homosexuality, five consider it a capital crime, and countries like Uganda are considering adding the death penalty to their laws criminalizing homosexuality."
This decision in the General Assembly flies in the face of the overwhelming evidence that people are routinely killed around the world because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation and renders these killings invisible or unimportant. The Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions has highlighted documented cases of extrajudicial killings on the grounds of sexual orientation including individuals facing the death penalty for consensual same-sex conduct; individuals tortured to death by State actors because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation; paramilitary groups killing individuals because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation as part of “social cleansing” campaigns; individuals murdered by police officers with impunity because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation; and States failing to investigate hate crimes and killings of persons because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation.
"It is a matter of great shame that the responsible Committee of the United Nations General Assembly failed in its responsibility to explicitly condemn well-documented killings based on sexual orientation," said John Fisher, Co-Director of ARC international. "The credibility of the United Nations requires protection of all persons from violations of their fundamental human rights, including on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. We thank those States which supported the inclusion of sexual orientation in the text, and will redouble our collective efforts to ensure that Member States of the United Nations maintain the standards they have sworn to uphold."
The amendment runs counter to other positive developments in UN and regional human rights systems where there is increased recognition of the need for protection from discrimination regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity. At a September 2010 panel held in conjunction with a session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon unequivocally recognized "the particular vulnerability of individuals who face criminal sanctions, including imprisonment and in some cases the death penalty, on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity."
Sixty-eight countries have also signed a joint statement in the UN General Assembly on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity which calls for an end to "human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity … in particular the use of the death penalty on this ground [and] extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions."
IGLHRC and ARC International urge all States, regardless of their vote on this amendment, to sign the UNGA joint statement affirming support of the human rights of all people, regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity and to continue in efforts to decriminalize same-sex conduct and to end other discrimination, including violence, on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
The votes to amend the resolution were as follows:
In favor of the amendment to remove sexual orientation from the resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (79):
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Benin, Botswana, Brunei Dar-Sala, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, China, Comoros, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guyana, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Opposed to the amendment to remove sexual orientation from the resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (70):
Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bhutan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Micronesia (FS), Monaco, Montenegro, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela
Abstain (17):
Antigua-Barbuda, Barbados, Belarus, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Colombia, Fiji, Mauritius, Mongolia, Papau New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Vanuatu
Absent (26):
Albania, Bolivia, Central African Republic, Chad, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Marshall Island, Mauritania, Nauru, Nicaragua, Palau, Sao Tome Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Togo, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan
The mission of The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) is advancing human rights for everyone, everywhere to end discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. A non-profit, non-governmental organization, IGLHRC is based in New York, with offices in Cape Town and Buenos Aires. Visit http://www.iglhrc.org for more information.
Printable Version
RSS Feed: 
Reader's Comments
Why is it bad?
The UN is a toothless paper tiger that presents it's self as some champion of human rights, but in fact has no power if a country decides not to follow their flimsey guidlines and rules. Bottom line? The UN is a waste of time and money.
i'm NOT surprised to find out my country , Indonesia has taken the vote to lift the ban.... there's a rising trend of extreme islamist in my country...
HOWEVER.. i am ASHAMED to my fellow country man who sit there at the UN! Those representatives of my country are truly ignorant on the fact that this vote would lead to disastrous consequences and also a direct violation on human rights .. didn't those so called religious muslim countries does not recognize there are also GAY muslim?
i'm not saying this because i hate islam or muslim people... i'm saying this because i am a muslim and lives in Indonesia, that's why i know what really happened in my country and i do know there are lots of gay who is also muslim and live a decent and honest life here in Indonesia.
hatred and ignorance .. shame on them, and they called themselves as advocate of humanity.. shame on them
A) Of those which supported the amendment:
1- China and Vietnam: which don't have anti-sodomy laws shouldn't have supported it
2- South Africa: which also doesn't have anti-sodomy law, and which should have become a democratic nation, shouldn't have supported it
3-Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadines: of which Head of State is still the Queen of England, shouldn't have supported it.
B) To those which rejected the amendment, salute! I am impressed by conservative, landlocked Bhutan's, and by the new nation East Timor's, pro-human rights votes.
C) I am disappointed with those that abstained:
1) Philippines: whose court had just made the celebrated pro-human rights decision to allow Ang Ladlad, a gay political party, to contest its Election, should have politicians who are just as just.
2) Singapore: shame, shame. It's probably the only advanced economy in the world that still has anti-sodomy law, and which openly declared that it would not proactively enforce it because it's wrong to do so. If it's not right to enforce this law proactively, why keep it?
3) Thailand: need I say more? As a Buddhist kingdom, its politicians should know better what Compassion is. Shouldn't it support a resolution that protects against violation of human rights?
If anyone had the time to collate the HIV infection rates of these member-countries (which were invited to vote on this Amendment), we could compare the average HIV Infection Rates of these 2 groups: (1) those that rejected the amendment and (2) those that supported it, abstained or were absent. My hunch is that Group (1) would have a much lower rate, because they are taking the right approach to counter stigma, the greatest threat to HIV spread. Those countries, such as Uganda, that are led by misguided, and often corrupted, politicians, would suffer among the highest rates. Unfortunately, despite repeated calls by the international community and UN to end their discriminatory policies, they continue to self-sabotage.
1) China
2) South Africa
3) Indonesia (where Bali is)
4) Egypt (where Cairo and its pyramids are)
5) Malaysia
6) UAE (where Dubai is)
7) Vietnam.
Remember that the following countries didn't bother to vote to keep resolution:
1) Philippines
2) Singapore
3) Sri Lanka
4) Mongolio
5) Cambodia
6) Thailand
7) Mauritius
8) Laos
9) Turkey.
Do you want to contribute your tourist dollars to these countries?
As a Buddhist, I feel ashamed of the responses of the Buddhist-majority countries in the above lists: Thailand, Sri Lanka, Cambodia and Laos. The Buddha's teachings, regardless of Theravadin or Mahayanist interpretations, are anchored on Compassion for all. Voting to exclude any vulnerable group from this resolution, or doing nothing to protect them from unjustified murder, is a stark disregard of the Buddha's teachings. Shame on you.
like what danielmcool mention... one of the reason being religion. Other smaller countries merely follow the votes of the bigger countries that overlook them... it's like that movie "The Cove"... people don't vote out of compassion etc, they vote out of personal gain, their own benefits in mind... well at least most of those idiotic 79 countries did...
shame is the right word...
Countries that abstained, like pathetic Singapore, have done so for fear of angering the Islamofascists who make spurious and debatable claims that Islam gives its practioners no choice but to impose the death penalty on those who engage in same sex sexual activity.
However, in the case of Singapore, it's stand is not inconsistent with its stand on the death penalty in general; fascists LOVE the death penalty because by criminalizing others to the extreme as only they can, they successfully distract everyone from their own criminal excesses.
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/11/28219/
I work in alliance with the Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC). I believe that it is time for those of us in relatively more privileged cicumstances where LGBT issues are concerned to treat the death penalty as an LGBT issue.
Anyway obviously the first group is just a huge group of loser states where all the citizens have almost no rights anyway.. such a sad world sometimes with all these people.
Israel is a prime example of another UN failure as Arab dictatorhips and their fellow travellers use the UN to lambast Democratic Israels justified security measures and attempts to reclaim their traditional lands (like east Jerusalem) from intransigent murderous Arab settlers, I'm all for ceasing trade and economic support to non-Democratic and oppressive Governments so their people end up rebelling against them and billing the UN for the housing and processing of all the economic refugees that is costing the Australian taxpayers billions I'm also for funding and promoting military training of Democratic freedom movements to over throw these oppressive feudal kingdoms & dictatorships just as the Israelis managed to do, so at least the Kurds, East Papuans, Tibetins, East Turkestan, Burmese, Thais and others shackled can at least put up a good fight to attain their freedom rather than live eternally imprisoned because the UN is failing them and western so called Democratic nations are too cowardly to speak up, the UN it's just a big status quo paper tiger who is sliding into complicity with genocide, it's time homosexual men stopped pansying their butts down the main streets in sham 'queer' parades and got serious about attaining real freedom and if that means joining or funding actual guerilla liberation movements so be it
Well now, at least, I have a complete no-go country list.
Three years after 1945, 1948 is a breakthrough year for the Jews where they have a home and formed a new state in Israel. Two years after 1976, 1978 is a breakthrough year for the Chinese when they started to have economic reforms and since then they have economic boom and is becoming a great modern State. Will three years later be a breakthrough for gays and lesbians, when there is a complete cure for HIV and gay and lesbians be able to hold hands publicly and get married to the same gender?
The Jews and homosexuals suffer alike because Jesus is both a Jew and Queer. The Chinese suffer because the three wise men from the East are Chinese, and likewise partake in the suffering of Christ.
No servant is greater than his Master! If his Master suffers, he will suffers like Him!
Just too bad that we are born in the wrong era, just like the Jews born in the 1930s in Europe and the Chinese born in the Mainland in the 1950s.
Of those 79 countries, how many follow WTO regulations... and the Russian Federation's President and Prime Minister just used the word "mercado" do describe that the Russian colonel who told the U.S. about Russia's 10 sleepers/spies in the U.S. would be hunted down and murdered... extra-judicial murders of gays is one thing... how about state sponsored murders, declared in the newspapers?
Has much changed from the 1960's/70's until now for some of these despot countries?
I agree that boycotting countries AND telling them we're doing this, will send a message... but China and economics play a disastrous role in the lead on morality. We need to future our own world... the U.N. won't do it... think Bosnia... think Rwanda... think gays...
I agree that boycotting countries AND telling them we're doing this, will send a message... but China and economics play a disastrous role in the lead on morality. We need to future our own world... the U.N. won't do it... think Bosnia... think Rwanda... think gays...
What is curious is the ANC Government has now expediently betrayed homosexual people after so many of us had supported their struggle and in South Africa many were in alliance with the ANC, Nelson Mandella is considered a grand statesman who brought his people to freedom but nobel peace prize aside remember he NEVER signed away the right for his people to take up arms to secure that freedom, it was fortunate they avoided a blood bath as the apartheit Government saw the writing on the wall and negotiated a peaceful settlement, Pagan people are ready to defend them selves against any attempt by christians to once again subjugate them (no more the burning times) so also must GLBT people be ready in defence of liberty if preferable peaceful means fail, we are global and could strike any time if we were sufficiently trained and financed could act decisively against those who would persecute or deny us liberty, hell the CIA do it the Russians do it, the radical Islamists & communists do it christians do it do it (more recently termination clinics) so why not us? in Australia as a result of the 1854 Eureka uprising the process of the Democratisation of our continent began and like the USA whose desire for freedom arose from Rebellion and armed insurrection is also historical fact, we should honour and find courage in historical truth and from the Israeli experience we can know a few determined souls with a desire to survive and thrive can out smart and over come a greater beligerent force and like wise carve out a place for our selves in a world that is often consideredand hostile the free movement of Homosexuals to safe havens must be allowed. of course the preference to a peaceful transition to liberty and Democracy is preferable but not always is it an option offered by others ask the Bosnians as NATO's military intervention was the only option left
"...western so called Democratic nations are too cowardly to speak up..."
One likely reason for that is the Western nations that you refer to have been successfully guilted by the many charges of racism levelled against them whenever they have stood up to human rights violations internationally.
It is based on the simplistic argument that the purported reason for what are really human rights violations are rooted in 'our' cultures. Oppose them, and if you are white you would be accused of being insensitive to 'our' cultures and thus racist.
Singapore led that charge way back when, but it was only when Muslim countries and especially China took up that line that the western world sat up and took notice. Africans have also joined in that fray.
This phenomenon of guilting - and feeling guilty - does have to be pointed out for any movement towards the restoration of human rights in violating countries.
1) To state WHY we are doing so. There are many ways to do so. You can, at an individual level, mention in your blog or Facebook that you will, for example, skip going to China or North Korea for holidays for 3 years BECAUSE of their vote against this Resolution. At a higher level, you can educate your friends who are concerned why they might want to do likewise. And, if you are truly angry, you could write their Tourism Board or Tourism Minister (e.g. Malaysia has one) to express your animosity.
2) Feedback to their stakeholders in the tourism industry. Examples are their associations for hotels, restaurants, shopping centres, etc. that tend to benefit from tourism.
3) The best way to deal with these politicians is through education. By educating more people about the importance of human rights, democracy and accountability, we can raise awareness on the ground gradually so that the voters/citizens will make the right decision when the time comes for them to choose their leaders, be it with their ballots or another means.
Every year that is until full rights to LGBTs are instated.
when did being gay mean having to be so political? executions? who even reads this stuff except Alex Au / Percole?
boycott singapore? has this guy gone completely nuts?
Is this what being gay is really about? just a political activity and rights?
Can't Fridae go back to its core and right some nice stories about romance and love instead of political struggle, sex in parks, BJs in dirty toilets and inciting political strife in the gay community?
gosh, again the feelings of gay men that really love life and the pulse of Singapore despite the politics are really crushed and hurt
Who the heck would be so anti-gay that they don't want people to visit Singapore? its pretty offensive
Gay men are generous and gracious and not bitter old kooks like Percole. We like it here and are role models in our jobs and professions and people respect us cause we are success.
Rights will come when people respect us and although the struggle is long, we have to work together to over come the negative behavior of a few individiuals and gay poltiical activists that are giving us a bad name and reputation. GLADD awards are given to people that promote a positive image in our community, period. (I have never seen a lawyer win one, though).
Gosh, I just want to be gay and have fun and I do have rights when I am well behaved. Singapore is not perfect, but does anyone know the tax rates for married gay couple in Canada (its awful).
The straight and gay community needs to see 377a abolished in the name of love and meaningful relationships and cause gay dads/ moms are very capable care givers.
Where is Singapore's Theodore Olsen making relevent and beautiful legal agruements on the sanctity of gay rights and marriage.
Instead, this is another example of misguided lawyers splitting fine hairs, stirring up discontent in the gay community, losing their message and audience and thinking there is some conspiracy out there. (Well, maybe my gay Stephen Hawking geeky gay fan club is working a bit overtime these days trying to find God in some galaxy far away).
The Christians have their distractions with that idiot Rory Tan but unfortunately, our gay community has a few nutty leaders distracting us from being united with uplifting and strongly inspirational messages based on the premise that we are cool and awesome and unique.
So guys be happy and successful and invite your boyfriends to come to Singapore for the weekend and to stay and love and be happy. Heck, I will even throw a classy party and invite everyone over to watch some hot guys in white jeans play polo.
so thanks to all the hotties supporting Lagunabro out there (the positive comments in my mailbox are now exploding, especially from lesbians mothers-- thanks for our shared interests in cooking and the Indigo girls). and you guys go buy a guy dinner before you have sex, spending more time kissing and spooning than fucking, hold hands in public, and remember gay romance is back big time in Singapore:)
this is not even an issue of sexual minority rites or religious or traditional conservative 'values', extra-judicial killing is wrong in every sense! It is black and white, as clear as day and night!
For example, for this particular article, the points might be:
1) There was a vote by countries who are members of the United Nations (UN) to amend an existing Resolution (Statement of Opinion or Position) of the UN. The amendment is solely on removing "sexual orientation" as a "discriminatory ground" in that Resolution.
2) The Resolution asks countries to protect human lives by investigating killings based on discriminatory grounds. One of the "discriminatory grounds" include "sexual orientation". In other words, homosexuality is recognised as a "discriminatory ground" in the Resolution.
3) The amendment was asked for by a group of African countries.
4) The results of the vote: 79 voted for amendment, 70 voted against amendment, 17 did not want to vote and 26 were absent. The list of countries and their responses are found in the article.
5) So, "sexual orientation" was successfully removed from the list of "discriminatory grounds" in that Resolution.
6) International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) and ARC International expressed disappointment with the vote and its results.
I think Fridae would make it easier for readers to understand articles like this if the above bullet points are provided on top of such articles. Additionally, Fridae's editors do not need to spend long hours to rewrite entire articles.
Anyone who can be TARGETED FOR KILLING, on the Basis
of Being a Gay or Suspected of Being a Gay.
Such an Convenient Way of getting Rid of One's Enemies
Or Whoever is Blocking in the way of the SELFISH interests
of the DESPICABLE and INHUMANE individuals.
Is it bad to the vote,yes! but if we PLU over-react to it it seems to me those are doing something bad,but we,taking tit for tat,make it worse.It, in addition ,shows that we are weak to some degree even some goverments of us can play this at the cost of us.
are we still at kingergarden,like boycotting Singapore and provoking countrymen to overthrow their governments.I know in Singapore they apprarnatly have section 337a, making it look pretty grim ,but in reality those no doubt will never be excuated,and thus it doesnt mean our government vote it Yes and they have 337A,PLUs share less freedom in terms of gay rights.
I do strongly believe we plu need to hear ( and they) more positive news ,like love story of us,coming out of those heros and our daily life, and they are so lacking that some of us get pathetic about happening around us.
Please log in to use this feature.