[After a heated debate lasting almost four hours, the 47-member state forum overcame strong objections by Saudi Arabia and Muslim countries to adopt a Western-backed resolution by a vote of 23 states in favour and 18 against with six abstentions. ... Mexico, which led Latin American states that were the main sponsors of the text, said that thousands of people are exposed to violence and discrimination due to their sexual orientation and gender identity. ... The United States and major European countries backed the resolution, while China, Russia and 16 African and predominantly Muslim states rejected it. India, South Africa and the Philippines were among the abstainers. ... Pakistan - speaking on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) of 57 states - decried the "promoting of certain notions, concepts and lifestyles on which there is no consensus".]
I/II. http://scroll.in/latest/810987/india-abstains-from-voting-on-un-resolution-to-appoint-an-lgbt-rights-expert INTERNATIONAL NEWS India abstains from voting on UN resolution to appoint an LGBT rights expert During a session of the UNHCR, 23 member countries were for the motion and 18 of them were against. Yesterday · 02:25 pm Updated Yesterday · 05:55 pm Scroll Staff India on Friday abstained from voting on a United Nations resolution that seeks to create the office of an independent expert to protect the rights of sexual minority groups. India was one of six countries that did not vote on the protection of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people. The resolution got the support of the United States, European and Latin American countries, but was opposed by China, Russia and several Islamic nations. Of the 47 member states at the forum, 23 voted for and 18 against the motion. India’s explanation for their abstention was that the matter is sub-judice, referring to the ongoing court case against Article 377, which criminalises "unnatural sex" and is widely interpreted as targeting homosexuals and other sexual minorities. LGBT activists in India criticised the government for its silence, saying it reflected their intolerance and homophobia. Transgender activist Akkai Padmashali said, “This is very disappointing…This is not the first time. When Mr Shashi Tharoor of the Congress presented a Private Member Bill in the Parliament on 377, the Parliament unanimously rejected it. That shows intolerance.” The move to bring in an LGBT rights official comes in the aftermath of the mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando. The expert will be appointed for three years. II. http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-un-rights-lgbt-idUKKCN0ZG2GY World | Thu Jun 30, 2016 6:19pm BST Related: WORLD U.N. rights council creates role of expert to protect LGBT people GENEVA | BY STEPHANIE NEBEHAY The U.N. Human Rights Council agreed on Thursday to appoint an independent investigator to help protect homosexuals and transgender people worldwide from violence and discrimination. ***After a heated debate lasting almost four hours, the 47-member state forum overcame strong objections by Saudi Arabia and Muslim countries to adopt a Western-backed resolution by a vote of 23 states in favour and 18 against with six abstentions.*** [Emphasis added.] The United Nations expert, still to be named, will have a three-year mandate. ***Mexico, which led Latin American states that were the main sponsors of the text, said that thousands of people are exposed to violence and discrimination due to their sexual orientation and gender identity.*** [Emphasis added.] "Remember Orlando," Mexican Ambassador Jorge Lomónaco told delegates, referring to the massacre of 49 people at a gay club in Florida on June 12. "Let us give hope to millions." ***The United States and major European countries backed the resolution, while China, Russia and 16 African and predominantly Muslim states rejected it. India, South Africa and the Philippines were among the abstainers.*** [Emphasis added.] "This Council regularly – and rightly – passes resolutions on racism, women and children. Yet, on this issue, we often hear of culture and tradition as reasons to justify violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity," British Ambassador Julian Braithwaite said in debate. "This affects people in this room, and people in my team who are LGBT. Are you saying it is okay to discriminate against them based on their sexual orientation and gender identity? To hit, torture, or possibly kill them? Because that is what you are supporting, if you vote against this resolution." Early in the session, Saudi Ambassador Faisal Trad brought a "no-action motion" to quash any debate on the resolution, but his move was defeated. Trad argued against what he called "the imposition of certain ideas" and said the new post would open up a "Pandora's box" while ignoring cultural and religious specificities. "We will not barter man-made legislation against divine laws," Trad said, invoking sharia (Islamic law). Nigeria called the resolution "divisive" and said that the sponsors also wanted to promote same-sex adoptions. ***Pakistan - speaking on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) of 57 states - decried the "promoting of certain notions, concepts and lifestyles on which there is no consensus".*** [Emphasis added.] In 2011, the U.N. rights body declared there should be no discrimination or violence against people based on their sexual orientation. At the time, Western countries called the vote historic but Islamic states firmly rejected it. (Reporting by Stephanie Nebehay; editing by Tom Miles/Mark Heinrich) -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
