The United Nations must defend all human rights

By Gauntlet Editorial Board

The United Nations General Assembly voted on Nov. 16 to amend a resolution condemning unjustified executions and remove all references to killings due to sexual orientation. The vote, which is brought forth every two years, changed a 2008 amendment to read “discriminatory reasons on any basis” instead of the previous words “sexual orientation.” The motion was made by Morocco and Mali on behalf of the UN’s Africa group. While the difference in wording is unlikely to result in a major change of standards for human rights violations, the vote does illustrate a major problem with the UN and some of its member countries.

Among the votes in support of the amendment were Algeria, China, Congo, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan and Yemen — essentially the worst human rights abusers in the world. Not a single African nation was in opposition to the amendment and the only Middle East country opposed was Israel. Given that 77 countries have laws against homosexuality and it is punishable by death in seven, it is unsurprising that 79 countries voted in support of the motion. In the case of South Africa, it is particularly disappointing that they voted in favour — they were the first country to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation, so this result is a major step back.

Gays are still supposed to be protected under the “discriminatory reasons on any basis” clause, but given the amount of countries where homosexuality is illegal, persecution is still likely to persist. Uganda is considering legislation which will make homosexual acts punishable by death. Further, anyone with knowledge of such acts (such as LGBT rights groups) can be jailed for up to three years if they

see UN, page 10

don’t report the offenders within 24 hours of finding out about them.

This vote shows that the UN is incapable of genuinely aiding the plight of oppressed groups so long as it continues to allow human rights to be defined in the manner it has been. To deny that gays have a unique interest in protection is to deny them the same treatment as those persecuted based on religion, ethnicity or gender. In large part this is because many of the countries that supported the amendment believe that homosexuality is a choice, as in Uganda, or that homosexuality isn’t a problem, as in Iran, where Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stated there are no gays. Progress will only be made once these barriers are removed.

The larger worry is that in spite of efforts of countries in North America and Europe to improve the treatment of oppressed groups in Africa and the Middle East, many continue to suffer. Continuing to allow amendments of this type to occur is not going to produce a solution. Instead, governments, in partnership with human rights organizations, must increase pressure on the worst offenders in order to persuade them to adopt reform. This can in part be accomplished through education — homosexuality is not a disease, nor is it a choice that can be changed given enough “treatment.”

The 20th century saw a marked improvement in the lives of oppressed peoples. That fragile progress is threatened — the solution is to show that toleration for different ways of life doesn’t extend to those who are intolerant based on arbitrary criteria.



. . Gauntlet Editorial Board