Subject: Euroletter 55 / part 1
From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 15:17:11 +0100 (MET)

No. 55			    November 1997

The Euro-Letter is published on behalf of ILGA-Europe - The European Region of 
the International Lesbian and Gay Association by Gay and Lesbian International 
Lobby in co-operation with The Danish National Association for Gays and 
Lesbians.
Editors: Steffen Jensen, Ken Thomassen, Peter Bryld, Lisbeth Andersen and Soeren 
Baatrup.

Contact to Euro-Letter:
E-mail: [email-masked]
URL: http://www.inet.uni2.dk/~steff
Fax: +45 2036 7856
Tel: +45 3324 6435
Mobile: +45 2033 0840
Mail: c/o Steffen Jensen, Gl. Kongevej 31, 4.th, DK-1610 Copenhagen V, Denmark

You can receive Euro-Letter by e-mail (send a message to the above address) 
and from no 30 onwards the Euro-Letters are available on the Internet at 
http://www.france.qrd.org/assocs/ilga/euroletter.html
http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/orgs/ILGA/euroletter

You can find a link to Euro-Letters at http://www.inet.uni2.dk/~steff

In this issue
- NGO status to ILGA within the Council of Europe
- ILGA-EUROPE ADDRESSES THE OSCE IMPLEMENTATION MEETING ON HUMAN DIMENSION 
ISSUES
- Update on the legal situation concerning homosexuality in the successor 
republics to the former Soviet Union
- PORTUGAL DE-EQUALIZED AGE OF CONSENT IN 1995
- AUSTRIA PROPOSED TWO PRO-GAY CANDIDATES FOR THE NEW COURT ON HUMAN RIGHTS 
- CYPRUS
- LATVIA
- Dutch May Allow Adoptions by Gays
- EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ESTABLISHES INTERGROUP ON GAY AND LESBIAN ISSUES
- SYMBOLIC DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP IN HAMBURG

The ILGA-Europe EU Action Plan and other documents relating to ILGA-Europe can 
be found at ILGA-Europe's homepage http://inet.uni2.dk/~steff/ilgaeur.htm

An update of the Survey on the Legal Situation for Gays and Lesbians in Europe 
can be found at http://inet.uni2.dk/~steff/survey.htm

A description of partnership laws and other laws regarding same-sex partners can 
be found at http://inet.uni2.dk/~steff/partner.htm

NGO STATUS TO ILGA WITHIN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE 
By Steffen Jensen

Following ILGA's application for consultative status (NGO-status), the Secretary 
General of the Council of Europe has decided in favour of granting consultative 
status to ILGA.

In conformity the the rules, the Secretary General has informed the Committee of 
Ministers and the Parlia- mentary Assembly of the decision on 15 October 1997. 
If no objection is raised by these two organs of the Council of Europe within a 
period of three months, the decision will become effective from 15 January 1998.

The opinion of the Secretary General reads:

"The ILGA is an active and representative organisa- tion in its filed of 
competence. It has already estab- lished working relations with the Council of 
Europe. Furthermore, the organisation has a specific contribu- tion to make to 
any discussion on discrimination generally as well as on more specific issues 
such as discrimination against people with HIV and AIDS.

For these reasons, the Secretary General decides in favour of granting 
consultative status to the Interna- tional Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA)."

ILGA-EUROPE ADDRESSES THE OSCE IMPLEMENTATION MEETING ON HUMAN DIMENSION ISSUES
by Kurt Krickler

Every second year, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe 
(OSCE) holds a three weeks implementation meeting to review the honouring of the 
human rights commitments of the 55 OSCE members states (which are all 45 
European states, the eight Asian former Soviet republics plus Canada and the 
USA). In 1993, the first OSCE implementation meeting recognised that the 
commitments to non- discrimination also cover sexual orientation although this 
commitment has never been included in one of the binding OSCE documents.

This year's implementation meeting took place from 12 to 28 November in Warsaw. 
ILGA-Europe submitted a Written Presentation to this meeting (see below) in 
order to be allowed to give an oral statement at the meeting itself. ILGA-Europe 
board member Kurt Krickler of HOSI Wien attended the meeting during three days 
and gave an oral statement
under agenda item "Tolerance and Non-discrimination" (see below).
Additionally, a written contribution prepared for agenda item "freedom of 
expression and association" was distributed to all delegations (see also below).

Contrary to previous OSCE meetings, national delegations did not refer at all to 
the this topic with the exception of the Netherlands whose delegate mentioned 
"homosexuals" in an enumeration of vulnerable groups in a statement on 
"Tolerance and Non-discrimination" on 18 November on behalf of the European 
Union. This was rather disappointing because ILGA-Europe had written before the 
Warsaw meeting to both the Luxembourg EU Presidency (Jean-Claude Juncker), the 
Dutch Foreign Minister (because the Netherlands were responsible for the EU 
position and paper on agenda item "Tolerance and Non-discrimination") and EU 
Commissioner Hans van den Broek demanding that the aspect of sexual orientation 
based discrimination be addressed by the EU in Warsaw. Considering that the 
Netherlands and Norway had already delivered a joint statement exclusively 
dealing with "Tolerance and Homosexuality" at the 1994 OSCE Review Conference in 
Budapest, the relevant input this year is really modest, not to say mediocre.

Kurt Krickler had also the opportunity to talk with representatives of the 
delegations of Denmark, Sweden (on the topic mentioned in the oral statement), 
Austria, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. 
Unfortunately, the delegates from the Asian republics in most cases had no idea 
about the present legal situation concerning homosexuality in their country. 
However, an up-date - also based on information distributed by amnesty 
international - is put together in this Euroletter.

Written presentation to the meeting by Kurt Krickler on behalf of ILGA-Europe

Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation is a Human Rights Violation
In recent years, non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation as a 
human rights obligation has received increasing attention at the international 
level and has been acknowl-edged as a relevant issue at several international 
and regional human rights platforms and bodies, such as the 2nd United Nations 
World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993 and the 4th UN World 
Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995.

Recognising non-discrimination based on sexual orientation as a human rights 
issue - Achievements on the international level

The pioneer in this respect was the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of 
Europe which adopted - as early as in 1981 - Recommendation 924 condemning all 
legal and social discrimination against homosexuals. 

On three occasions, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg ruled the 
prohibition of homosexual acts between consenting adults to be a violation of 
the European Human Rights Convention. In October 1997, the European Human Rights 
Commission ruled that an unequal age of consent for homosexuals and 
heterosexuals likewise constitutes a human rights violation.

In 1994, the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled (in Toonen vs. 
Australia) that the rights of lesbians and gay men to privacy and equality were 
guaranteed by the provisions of the "International Covenant on Civil and 
Political Rights" (ICCPR). Criminal laws prohibiting homosexuality among 
consenting adults violate Article 17 of the ICCPR. What makes this decision to 
the most important one to date in international human rights law, however, is 
that the Committee also noted in its decision that "the reference to 'sex' in 
articles 2 (1) and 26 [of the ICCPR] is to be taken as including sexual 
orientation."

Another recent landmark achievement was the adoption of the "Resolution on equal 
rights for homosexuals and lesbians in the EC" by the European
Parliament in 1994. In this Resolution, the EP calls on all member states to 
repeal all anti-homosexual law provisions and to end all sexual orientation 
based discrimination, including the barring of lesbian and gay couples from 
marriage or equivalent legal framework. 

This Resolution was reiterated by the European Parliament on two more occasions, 
e.g., in the annual reports and resolutions on the observance of human rights in 
the EU for 1994 (A4-0223/96) and 1995 (A4-0112/97).

Finally, the 15 EU member states included "sexual orientation" in the 
anti-discrimination clause - the new Article 6a - of the Treaty of Amsterdam.

Achievements on the national level
Since the OSCE Review Conference in Vienna last year, further improvement and 
progress have also occured in various OSCE member states. Austria finally 
repealed the ban on positive information about
homosexuality and the ban on the founding of gay and lesbian organisations, 
Macedonia has prepared - in line with commitments entered on the occasion of her 
admission to the Council of Europe - a new penal
code which does not provide for a total ban on homosexuality any longer. San 
Marino has abolished the only anti-homosexual provision in her penal code. 
Russia equalised unequal age of consent laws. Joining the Scandinavian countries 
and Iceland, the Dutch Parliament voted a registered partnership law which will 
give same-sex couples almost the same rights as married couples. Similar bills 
on registered partnership are debated in the Parliaments of Finland, Spain, 
France, Portugal, Luxembourg and Belgium. Luxembourg introduced an 
anti-discrimination law that also prohibits discrimination and hatred crimes 
against lesbians and gays - and thus joined eleven OSCE countries with similar 
provisions.

Unfortunately, these positive advances are only part of the story. 
Discrimination against lesbians and gay men continue in some OSCE countries:
Cyprus has not yet implemented the 1993 verdict of the European Court of Human 
Rights to repeal the total ban on homosexuality. Romania has only partly 
decriminalised homosexuality in 1996, but introduced a severe provision that 
provides up to five (!) years imprisonment for founding gay and lesbian 
associations and for all forms of "proselytism" for homosexuality. According to 
the information available to us, a total ban on homosexuality still exists in 
Bosnia-Herzegovina, most of the non-European former Soviet republics as well as 
in more than 20 states of the United States of America. Unequal age of consent 
laws, according to the recent decision of the European Human Rights Commission a 
violation of the Convention, still exist in Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the 
Faroe Islands, Finland, Hungary, Liechtenstein, Romania, Serbia, the United 
Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, and Gibraltar.

"Sexual Orientation" in the OSCE process
The issue of sexual orientation based discrimination was discussed within the 
CSCE/OSCE on several occasions, including all Implementation Meetings and Review 
Conferences. It was also mentioned in the Final Reports of the 1993 
Implementation Meeting ("It was pointed out that CSCE Commitments in the area of 
non-discrimination cover homosexuals as well.") and the 1996 Review Conference. 
In July 1995, the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE adopted a Resolution which 
calls on member states 
 "...to ensure that all persons belonging to different segments of their 
population be accorded equal respect and consideration in their constitutions, 
legislation and administration and that there be no subordination, explicit or 
implied, on the basis of ethnicity, race, colour, language, religion, sex, 
sexual orientation, national or social origin or belonging to a minority..."

Appeal to all OSCE member states to honour their commitments in the field of 
non-discrimination based on sexual orientation
The above quoted decisions and resolutions clearly show that non-discrimination 
based on sexual orientation is not only a commitment in the framework of the 
OSCE process but also a commitment under a series of other human rights 
conventions and instruments.

We, therefore, appeal to all OSCE member states to honour these commitments and 
to take steps to eliminate all existing legal and social discrimination against 
lesbians and gay men and to guarantee full human rights to their homosexual 
citizens.

(Written) Statement presented to the OSCE IMPLEMENTATION MEETING, SUBSIDIARY 
WORKING BODY 1, by ILGA-Europe

Concerning the issue of the freedom of expression, association and peaceful 
assembly, the European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association 
has to constate that these fundamental freedoms and human rights are not fully 
respected in all OSCE participating States when it comes to lesbians and gay 
men.

When Romania finally decriminalised homosexuality among consenting adults in 
1996, severe provisions were, instead, introduced in the notorious Article 200 
of the Romanian criminal code. The "reformed" article, for instance, provides 
for prison terms from one to five (!) years for "propaganda, organising, 
associating and any other forms of proselytism" in the context of homosexuality. 
People could go to jail for founding a gay and lesbian association or for 
spreading positive
information on homosexuality, e.g., for exercising their guaranteed freedoms of 
expression, association, and peaceful assembly.

Alone the term used in the new version of Article 200, "pro-selytism", shows 
what weird concepts of homosexuality seem to exist in the minds of certain 
people, politicians and legislators. Homosexuality is nothing you can 
proselytise for, nothing to persuade people into. Homosexual or heterosexual 
orientation is nothing a person can deliberately choose or change. It is 
impossible to turn heterosexuals into homosexuals - or vice versa - by 
advertising or propaganda. People do not acquire their sexual orientation in the 
same patterns as they choose a certain brand of tooth paste or washing powder.

This new provision of the Romanian penal code, therefore, is not only ridiculous 
but a severe restriction and violation of the fundamental freedoms of 
expression, association and peaceful assembly of lesbians and gay men. This law 
is a permanent intimidation of gays and lesbians in Romania and, therefore, must 
be rejected by the international community of democratic countries. Moreover, 
the severe punishment provided - one to five years in prison - is completely 
disproportionate in comparison with sentences for genuine crimes.

Romania, by the way, is not the only OSCE country that violates the freedom of 
expression and association of gays and lesbians. We have to mention that 
Liechtenstein has similar articles in her penal code.

The European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association would also 
like to highlight one aspect which we consider very important in the discussion 
about freedom of expression and religion. This aspect are the tensions and 
conflicts involved with these two freedoms in the context of hate speech. 
Invididuals, religious or other groups who express hate speech or even call for 
violence against certain groups, who reinforce prejudice and hatred against 
certain minorities should be restricted in their anti-democratic action by 
anti-discrimination provisions protecting vulnerable groups from such verbal 
violence. Hate speech violating the human dignity of individuals or groups is a 
clear abuse of the freedom of expression. Any attempt to misuse freedom of 
religion to sow hate against certain groups must also be strictly rejected. Such 
irresponsible abuse cannot be tolerated in a society which respects human rights 
and fundamental freedoms.

ORAL STATEMENT 
By Kurt Krickler (ILGA-Europe)
in SUBSIDIARY WORKING BODY 1

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to address this meeting on behalf of the 
European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA), a 
federation of organisations fighting discri-mination against homosexual women 
and men, with members in almost all European countries.

Today's agenda item includes a series of attitudes and behaviour considered as 
intolerant and detrimental to both the minorities and communities effected and 
to society at large. Discrimination based on gender, sex, race, religion, 
colour, etc. is generally conceived as such and as a human rights violation. 
Sexism, racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, however, have a sibling which should 
be subject to the same concern of us all: and that is homophobia.

Lesbian women and gay men are one of the declared targets of forces which fight 
against minorities and those who are different. Lesbians and gay men are the 
victims of death squads in South America, of skinheads and neo-fascists in 
Western Europe, and of street gangs in North America. This effects also advanced 
democracies, such as for example Sweden. On 9 September of this year, the 
Swedish newspaper "Aftonbladet"
published a list of 27 gay men and lesbians who have been murdered in hate 
crimes in Sweden during the last ten years. And still, the Swedish Parliament 
had refused this year to include homosexuals in a law to criminalise hatred 
speech against certain minority groups. Legal protection from hatred speech is 
essential because the transition from verbal to physical attacks is often very 
short. When physical aggression already occurs, legal protection arrives too 
late. The "Reichskristallnacht" - we all know - did not either come like a bolt 
from the blue but the way to these atrocities had been paved by anti-Semitic 
hatred speech over many years. We, therefore, note with satisfaction that 
Luxembourg included the prohibition of hatred speech in her new 
anti-discrimination law passed last June. This should serve as a model for other 
countries.

However, how can we expect tolerance and non-discrimination from the average 
citizen if the State itself discriminates against lesbians and gays in the laws? 
Criminalisation and legally and societally approved stigmatisation of 
homosexuality are the origin of intolerance against gays and lesbians. 
Therefore, repealing all anti-homosexual legislation
is a precondition for tolerance and non-discrimination in society. And this is 
also a commitment under the OSCE process and under various human rights 
instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and 
the European Human Rights Convention as ILGA-Europe has documented in detail in 
its Written Presentation to this meeting.

In 1994, the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled (in Toonen vs. 
Australia) that the rights of lesbians and gay men to privacy and equality are 
guaranteed by the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and 
Political Rights (ICCPR). Criminal laws prohibiting homosexuality among 
consenting adults, therefore, violate Article 17 of the Covenant. According to 
the information available to us, a total ban on homosexuality, however, still 
exists in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cyprus, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, 
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and in more than 20 states of the United 
States of America.

In October 1997, the European Human Rights Commission ruled that an unequal age 
of consent for homosexuals and heterosexuals constitutes a violation of the 
European Convention. Nevertheless, unequal age of consent laws continue to exist 
in Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Faroe Islands, Finland, Hungary, 
Liechtenstein, Romania, Serbia, the United
Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, and Gibraltar.

ILGA has been participating as an NGO in the Human Dimension of the OSCE since 
1991, and we find it extremely frustrating that we year after year have to 
remind the countries just mentioned to honour their commitments entered not only 
under the OSCE process but also under the International Covenant and the 
European Convention. We also believe that too little effort is made by the 
community of the OSCE countries to implement compliance with this part of OSCE 
commitments in negligent countries that fail to honour these commitments.

We, therefore, urge the OSCE to emphasize the implementation of 
non-discrimination against lesbians and gay men and to monitor it more closely 
with non-complying countries.

We also urge the delegations of the countries concerned to more firmly report 
back to their governments and parliaments that they ignore relevant decisions 
both of the UN Human Rights Committee and the European Commission and Court of 
Human Rights and that they do not honour their OSCE commitments in this field.

PREPARATION OF THE OSCE MEETING

On preparing the OSCE Implementation meeting the following letter was sent to 
the Dutch minister of foreign affairs, mr. van Mierlo:

"ILGA-Europe, the European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay 
Association, with member organisations in almost all European countries, has 
been informed that the Dutch government is preparing the EU position and paper 
on "Tolerance and Non-discrimination" for the Third OSCE Implementation Meeting 
on Human Dimension Issues to take place in Warsaw from 13 to 28 November 1997.

ILGA has been participating in relevant CSCE/OSCE meetings since the Third 
Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE in Moscow in 1991. 
We have been lobbying for the recognition of discrimination based on sexual 
orientation as a Human Dimension issue ever since.

We expect from the Dutch government in particular and from the EU in general to 
positively include sexual orientation issues in the relevant paper for the 
upcoming Warsaw meeting. For we remember that the Dutch and Norwegian 
delegations had presented a joint statement entitled "Tolerance and 
Homosexuality" at the CSCE Review Meeting in Budapest in 1994 - this was the 
first governmental statement in the whole CSCE process devoted exclusively to 
sexual orientation issues. Both the Dutch intervention on behalf of the EU at 
the 1995 Implementation Meeting in Warsaw and the statement of Ireland on behalf 
of the EU at the 1996 Review Conference in Vienna referred again to sexual 
orientation based discrimination as a matter of concern.

The OSCE also has a good record of recognising sexual orientation based 
discrimination. At the (First) CSCE Implementation Meeting on Human Dimension 
Issues in Warsaw in 1993, this issue was for the first time acknowledged by the 
CSCE/OSCE. The Final Report of that meeting devoted the following lines to the 
gay and lesbian issue (it was adopted unanimously by the plenary):

"Participants pointed out to groups which were not "national minorities" but 
which none the less suffered discrimination, including women, homosexuals, 
migrant workers, and conscientious objectors... 

It was pointed out that CSCE commitments in the area of non-discrimination cover 
homosexuals as well. Suggestions were made that discriminatory State policies 
against homosexuals, and criminalizing
legislation, should be eliminated."

In July 1995, at their 4th Annual Session in Ottawa, the Parliamentary Assembly 
of the OSCE adopted a Resolution which calls on member states

"...to ensure that all persons belonging to different segments of their 
population be accorded equal respect and consideration in their constitutions, 
legislation and administration and that there be no subordination, explicit or 
implied, on the basis of ethnicity, race, colour, language, religion, sex, 
sexual orientation, national or social origin or belonging to a minority..."

Discrimination based on sexual orientation was mentioned again as a matter of 
concern in the final report of the 1996 Review Conference.

In view of this history and the general recognition of
non-discrimination based on sexual orientation as a human rights issue in the 
OSCE context, we are confident and optimistic that the Dutch government will 
come forward with a paper which not only will not ignore this issue but will 
stress its relevance for the Human Dimension of the OSCE and which will be 
consistent with other EU human rights policies concerning lesbians and gays.

This inclusion of the issue of sexual orientation discrimination is so important 
because homosexuality is still illegal in several OSCE participating States, 
others still have discriminatory anti-homosexual provisions in their penal 
codes. In many countries, the social situation of lesbians and gay men needs 
urgent improvement. It is crucial for the credibility of the OSCE Human 
Dimension process that the persecution and oppression of and the discrimination 
against homosexuals and the violation of their human rights be openly discussed 
and debated in a forum such as the Implementation Meeting in Warsaw.

We hope that the relevant Dutch paper will take this issue into consideration 
and look forward to your kind reply which you can also direct to the address 
given below.

***************************
Steffen Jensen
E-mail: [email-masked] 
http://inet.uni2.dk/~steff
Tel. +45 3324 6435 or +45 2033 0840  Fax: +45 2036 7856
From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 15:21:23 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Euroletter 55 / part 2

Update on the legal situation concerning homosexuality in the successor 
republics to the former Soviet Union
by Kurt Krickler

As mentioned in Euroletter # 54, amnesty international has published a paper 
called "Commonwealth of Independent States - Amnesty International working 
against laws punishing sexual relations between men". The following information 
is taken from this paper and from conversations with the relevant countries' 
OSCE delegates in Warsaw.

While all seven European successor republics to the Soviet Union (Belarus, 
Estonia, Moldova, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine) have meanwhile repealed 
the total ban on male homosexuality inherited from the Soviet era (Art. 121.1 in 
Russia) which provided prison terms of up to five years, the situation is 
different in the eight Asian successor republics. The three Caucasian republics 
Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia are applicants for membership in the Council of 
Europe, and they - like other former East-bloc countries did - receive help from 
Council of Europe experts in drafting the new penal codes. It, therefore, can be 
expected that these countries' new criminal codes will not punish homosexuality 
among consenting adults any longer. The delegate of Georgia at the OSCE meeting 
in Warsaw informed the author of this update that the new Georgian penal code 
had already been adopted. She promised to provide concrete information about the 
new situation concerning
homosexuality. In Armenia, the draft for a new penal code had its first reading 
in April 1997, the second reading is schedulded, according to the Armenian OSCE 
delegate, for this winter. In Azerbaijan, the new penal code is still under 
preparation. Therefore, Article 116.1 of the Armenian and Article 113.1 of the 
Azerbaijan penal code formally are still in force.

In the five Central Asian republics, the situation also varies. Amnesty had 
reported already in 1993 that Kazakstan would have repealed Article 104.1 of its 
penal code but this turned out not to be correct. However, now in 1997 the new 
penal code has been signed into law by the President and will enter into force 
as of 1998. Homosexual acts between consenting adults will no longer be a crime.

According to amnesty international, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan still use the old 
Soviet criminal code which means that Article 112.1 of the Kyrgyz and Article 
125.1 of the Tajik penal code formally are still in force.

TURKMENISTAN, however, has already adopted a new penal code in 1997 which 
meanwhile has been signed into law by the President. It is unclear whether 
Article 126.1 has been repealed. The OSCE delegate of Turkmenistan could not 
give any concrete information. In neighbouring UZBEKISTAN the new penal code of 
1995 did not bring much improvement for gay men. The new Article 120 still 
punishes sodomy ("besakalbazlyk" in Uzbek) between consenting adults by up to 
three years' imprisonment.

PORTUGAL DE-EQUALIZED AGE OF CONSENT IN 1995
by Helmut Graupner, Rechtskomitee LAMBDA, Vienna

In 1995 Portugal introduced a new Penal Code (Decreto-Lei no. 48/95, 
15.03.1995). Officially it has been called a sole revision of the Code of 1982 
but in fact it is a new Code, since the Articles have been renumbered and 
regrouped extensively, so that they don´t corresponmd anymore.

In 1945 Portugal decriminalized homosexuality for the second time in its history 
(the first time was in 1852, but the total ban has been reintroduced in 1912) 
and set an equal age limit of 16. The Criminal Code of 1982 took over this equal 
minimum age limit for hetero- and homosexual acts at 16 (HTS: Art.  206, 203, 
HS: Art. 206, 207). Just the penalties laid down in the case of „seduction“ of 
14 and 15 year old adolescents have been different. For homosexual „seduction“ 
(„desencaminhar“) the penalty was up to 3 years (Art. 207), for „seduction“ to 
(heterosexual) vaginal intercourse („tiver copula ... abusando da ... 
inexperiancia ou mediante promessa séria de casamente“) however up to 2 years 
(Art. 203) and for „seduction“ to all other forms of heterosexual contact just 
up to 1 year (Art. 206). But when no „seduction“ was involved the penalty laid 
down for hetero- and homosexual conduct with 14 and 15 year old adolescents was 
equal, up to 1 year (Art. 206). Also the penalties for sexual conduct with 
minors under 14 were set equally (Art. 201, 202, 205).

The reform of 1995 lowered the general age limit to 14 (Art. 172 CC) but kept a 
special offence of  homosexual relations with 14 and 15 year old adolescents 
(Art. 175 CC: up to 2 years jail). Heterosexual relations with 14 and 15 year 
old adolescents are criminal only if the minor is „seduced“ (Art. 174 CC: 
„abusando da sua inexperiancia“; up to 2 years jail).

The new provisions have been reproduced in Euroletter 48 (6) correctly but the 
interpretation given in Euroletter 47 (4) has been incorrect. The reform 95 did 
not equalize a prior difference 14-16 but - the other way round - did introduce 
the prior not existing difference. 

The discriminatory higher age of consent for gays and lesbians has been 
criticized in the scientific literature (see Teresa Pizarro Beleza, Sem Sombra 
de Pecado - O Repensar dos Crimes Sexuais na Revisao do Código Penal, University 
of Lisboa 1996, p. 27) but it is still on the book. And the number of the 
Article corresponds to the former German anti-homosexual law: Art. 175.

AUSTRIA PROPOSED TWO PRO-GAY CANDIDATES FOR THE NEW COURT ON HUMAN RIGHTS 
by Helmut Graupner, Rechtskomitee LAMBDA, Vienna

The Austrian Government recently announced the three proposed candidates for the 
Austrian judge on the forthcoming permanent European Court on Human Rights. Two 
of them supported Lesbian and Gay Rights in the past.

Dr. Willi Fuhrmann currently is a member of the Austrian parliament and the 
spokesperson for judicial affairs of the Austrian Social-Democratic Party (SPÖ). 
In past year´s debate on the discriminatory age of consent for gay male 
relations (Art. 209 CC) he pushed for a repeal of Art. 209 and voted for that 
repeal (as all MPs of his party did).

Univ.-Prof. Dr. Manfred Nowak, professor for constitutional law at the 
University of Vienna and head of the Ludwig-Boltzmann-Institute for Human Rights 
(Vienna), acted as Special UN-Rapporteur for Sarajevo and as one of the experts 
heard by the Austrian parliament in 1995 on the homosexual age of consent he 
stressed the rights of lesbian and gays and pointed to the incompatibility of 
the higher minimum age for gays with the European Convention on Human Rights. 
Prof. Nowak strongly supports l/g rights and equality beyond the area of 
criminal law and underlines that attitude by his membership in the board of 
trustees („Kuratorium“) of Rechtskomitee LAMBDA (RKL).

Since the present Austrian judge at the European Convention on Human Rights, 
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Franz Matscher, made a bad impression with his anti-l/g 
(dissenting) opinions, it would be very important the one of the two mentioned 
candidates will be elected to the new permanent Court on Human Rights. 

Please lobby your countries members to the COE-Parliamentary Assembly in this 
respect.

CYPRUS
By Bjoern Skolander

As the enclosed article from Cyprus Mail shows, the Cypriot politicians have not 
yet decided to decriminalise homosexual act between consenting
adults. The Swedish Amnesty group for Gay and Lesbian Concerns was earlier this 
year urging Amnesty International to issue a statement in support of a 
decriminalisation, which eventually was done in May 1997.

However we believe that more pressure is needed to force the politicians in 
Cyprus to finally come to the one and only decision. As you know, Cyprus is 
applying for EU membership. On behalf of the Swedish gl AI group I would like to 
suggest, that ILGA Europe informs its political contacts within the
EU structure about Cyprus' continued refusal to lift the ban on gay sexual acts. 
We believe that a political discussion in the European Parliament would be 
extremely helpful at this point in time to have the ban lifted.

CYPRUS MAIL
Saturday, October 11, 1997

Cyprus must lift ban on gay sex

FOREIGN Minister Yiannakis Cassoulides this week said he considered it a 
"serious mistake" that the House had not yet decriminalised homosexual relations 
between consenting adults in private.

He warned that Cyprus would face pressure from the Council of Europe over this 
failure to bring its laws into line with those in the European Union and 
elsewhere.

Mr Cassoulides is absolutely right to deplore the House's foot-dragging on this 
issue. It is inexcusable for a country which considers itself on a par with 
developed Western countries, and which aspires to become a member of the 
European Union, to continue to brand homosexuals as criminals. In the West, 
popular art forms, far from maligning homosexuals as social pariahs, now 
represent them sympathetically, thus changing the way they are perceived. This 
is a reflection of the parallel freedom afforded to gay people by the law. Films 
such as Philadelphia and Four Weddings and a Funeral illustrate how homosexuals 
have become increasingly integrated into mainstream American and European 
society.

How then can a supposedly modern, educated country like Cyprus continue to 
relegate some of its citizens to the fringes of society, denying them the basic 
right to an identity? 

In Cyprus, being called a homosexual is still a term of abuse. Few gay people 
are open about their sexual orientation because of the prejudice they face. 
'Unmanly' behaviour in boys and 'unwomanly' behaviour in girls is frowned upon 
by adults adhering to the stereotyped ideas of male/female behaviour. We are 
brought up to believe that homosexuals are the worst kind of degenerate: 
effeminate, limp-wristed 'queens' or butch, leather-clad 'dykes' who prey on 
unsuspecting youths and revel in orgiastic excesses and drugs. We ignore the 
fact that these vices are just as common among heterosexuals who are responsible 
for the majority of crimes, and that it does not follow that a person 
automatically has sociopathic tendencies if he or she is gay. 

Absurdly, we convince ourselves that these people choose to be homosexual. But 
which sane person, in the face of so much hostility, not to mention persecution 
by the law, would 'choose' to be gay? Even women who have been 'left on the 
shelf' - and that is stigma enough in Cypriot society - are in a better position 
than homosexuals: at least they don't have to be invisible.

Matters are not helped by the lack of compassion shown by the Orthodox Church. 
The latter has done nothing to ease the burden of these shunned individuals; 
encouraging instead the popular fallacy that homosexuality is somehow a sin 
above all other sins. There is nothing to suggest this in the scriptures; all 
sin is shown to have the same measure of evil in God's eyes. Christ himself 
befriended social outcasts such as tax-collectors, harlots and thieves.

In the face of such unrelenting opposition from the Church, however, it is not 
surprising that the law still prohibits sexual intercourse between consenting 
adults of the same sex. The law, which should have been the guardian of 
homosexuals' rights and which has always had the power to eradicate social 
taboos, remains an insurmountable obstacle to the acceptance and integration of 
homosexuals into society. This is plainly unjust. 

It is high time to put an end to this injustice and to recognise the rights of a 
significant section of the Cypriot population. People who have the same legal 
duties and pay the same taxes as the heterosexual majority should also have the 
same legal protection. This is the only correct course of action for a country 
that considers its citizens educated and forward- looking and which hopes to 
become a member of the European Union. 

Ironically, as gay-rights campaigner Alecos Modinos suggested in a recent TV 
interview, Cyprus more than any other country can ill-afford the luxury of 
denying such rights; it has experienced first-hand how deep the scars of 
injustice can run. (© Copyright 1997 Cyprus Mail)

CYPRUS MAIL
Wednesday, November 5, 1997

Government pleads with deputies to decriminalise homosexuality
By Martin Hellicar

THE government again pleaded with the House yesterday to stop dragging it's feet 
and approve a law decriminalising homosexuality.

"I want to repeat to you that the government wants this law passed," Foreign 
Minister Yiannakis Cassoulides told the House Foreign Affairs committee.

And a representative of the Attorney-general's office told deputies Cyprus ran 
the risk of being thrown out of the Council of Europe (CoE) if sex between 
consenting adult males was not decriminalised.

The CoE has repeatedly warned the government that it must conform with a 1993 
European Court of Human Rights ruling in favour of Cypriot gay activist Alecos 
Modinos. The House was due to vote on an amendment decriminalising homosexuality 
last May, but the debate was postponed in the face of strong opposition from the 
Church and some deputies.

The Attorney-general's representative told deputies a refusal to abide by the 
European court ruling weakened Cyprus's bargaining position in Europe.
"We expect the court to pressure Turkey to implement decisions in our favour on 
human rights issues and at the same time we are in the position of ignoring the 
court on what is, after all, an issue of far lesser importance," she said.

"We cannot have the luxury of picking and choosing when to conform with the 
court's decisions. In Strasburg, they equate our non-confirmation with
Turkey's," she added.

She said the government had managed to secure consideration of the issue by the 
CoE last month, but time was running out.

Cassoulides said the postponement had only been secured on the understanding 
that the government "had a clearly stated position that the law must be passed."

However, committee chairman Tassos Papadopoulos stuck to his party's guns, 
repeating that Diko deputies would not vote for the bill. "The amendment will 
not pass," he said. (© Copyright 1997 Cyprus Mail)

LATVIA
By Ainaars, Homosexuality Information Centre, Latvia

Statement of the Homosexuality Information Centre (HIC)  "On Homophobia and 
Intolerance  in Police and Other State Institutions in Latvia"

In 1991 the Republic of Latvia regained its indepence from the Soviet Union.  
Shortly afterwards Latvia signed Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other 
international human rights instruments.  However, Latvia has not so far ratified 
the framework convention on minorities and the European Social Chapter.  Latvia 
is also a member of the Council of Europe and a contracting party to the 
European Convention on Human Rights although with some reservations.  The top 
priority goal in foreign policy of Latvia is to join the European Union.  Thus 
Latvia stated her will to be a part of a collective of democratic states where 
fundamental rights such as
development of each person free from any discrimination, freedom of expression 
and opinion are accepted and safeguarded. 

Nevertheless, intolerance, discrimination and violance towards certain persons 
and minority groups still exist in Latvia.  In an opinion on Latvia's 
application for membership in the European Union which was adopted this June the 
Commission of the European Community expressed its serious concern regarding the 
position of minorities in the country and stated that "Latvia needs to take 
measures ... to ensure equality of treatment for non-citizens and minorities, in 
particular for access to ... participation
in the democratic process" . One such minority goup is homosexuals, lesbian 
women and gay men. 

During the investigation which was carried out by HIC it was discovered that 
this  minority group suffers intolerance and discrimination not only
from fellow citizens but also from the State authorities.  Latvian State 
authorities openly ignore both the recommendation by the international and
European institutions to combat any forms of discrimination and suggestions for 
legislative amendments aiming to improve the lesbian and gay situation in the 
country from the non-governmental organizations.  Moreover, members of the 
Latvian parliament openly state their strongly negative attitudes towards 
lesbians and gays and call them "ill, abnormal".  Former prime-minister Andris 
Skele even suggested that for persons working for the
state institutions the "correct" sexual orientation is absolutely imperative.  
One of the parliamentary human rights commission members, during a discussion on 
inclusion of sexual orientation into a paragraph of the Criminal Code containing 
the gounds on which any discrimination is criminalized, ironically commented 
that homosexuals did not deserve any legal protection and described homosexuals 
as one of the lowest society groups.  Such intolerant comments from the 
officials of the highest rank promote further discrimination of the lesbian and 
gay community in Latvia.

Such attitudes are taking as everyday practice by the Latvian Police force.  In 
the summer of 1997 a newspaper of the city of Bauska "Atspulgs" published an 
interview with a gay couple in which a policeman Gatis Bugoveckis confessed his 
homosexuality and that he was in arelationship with another man.  Gatis also 
mentioned that he was planning to get a similar job within the police force in 
Riga and that he had received all necessary documents from Riga and could start 
his duty there.  Answering one of the journalist's questions, Gatis stated that 
he was not the only homosexual within his police office.

Immediately after the interview was published, the police of Bauska assembled a 
certification commission which decided to inform the Personnel
Department of the Interior Ministry of Gatis Bugoveckis' homosexual orientation. 
 The commission also attached a copy of the interview to the letter for the 
Ministry.  After the interview was published when Gatis came to the police 
office to carry on his duty he discovered that another person
had taken over his job. Also the police office in Bauska pursuaded their 
colleagues in Riga not to accept Gatis at work although formally he was already 
accepted.  A chief of the Bauska order police office Edmunds Zubeens insisted 
that Gatis must name other homosexuals withing the police station and made it 
understood that otherwise Gatis would have to leave his job "voluntarily".  As a 
result of the pressure Gatis resigned.  However, all conversations in the police 
office were recorded on an audiocassette
which is now the property of HIC to provide evidence of the pressure on Gatis.  
Members of the Bauska police office considered Gatis' press interview as an 
insult and humiliation of their honour.  Since then the
security of Gatis and his partner has been under danger  and there are occasions 
when the partners have been threatened with physical persecution
and their dignity humiliated.

This case is one of many where the police forces demonstrate their attitude 
towards lesbians and gay men.  HIC also possesses other evidence of the
police forces' homophobic attitude.  

It has to be underlined that  in order to become a member of the police force in 
Latvia a candidate has to visit a psychiatrist which among other questions asks 
about the candidate's sexual orientation.  

Members of the lesbian and gay community have on many occasions appealed to 
different Latvian and foreign institutions in order to attract attention to
their situation.  Unfortunately, none of these appeals have resulted in any 
attention from the Latvian State authorities.  For example, the Latvian 
parliament has so far been considering a legislative amendment to include sexual 
orientation in the list of grounds on which discrimination is prohibited for 4 
years!

As the above mentioned facts and described case demonstrate the Latvian 
authorities do not demonstrate any intention to combat discrimination
against lesbians and gays and it is too early to speak about a democratic system 
of the Latvian state where fundamental rights are declared and safeguarded.

Taking into account that:

Latvian lesbians and gays do not enjoy legal protection and the same rights as 
their heterosexual fellow citizens and thus are discriminated against by 
legislation, and the legislature does not intend to resolve this descrimination 
and inequality,
 homophobia does not constitute an unlawful act, moreover it is indirectly 
promoted by some Latvian politicians and is practised by the police and other 
state authorities, with words such as "lesbian", "gay", and "homosexual" 
considered as indecent,
lesbians and gays suffer physical violence, social rejection, verbal abuse and 
harrassement.  As a result lesbians and gays have to hide their sexuality and 
those who do not hide it face serious problems

HIC calls

upon the President of the Republic of Latvia to:
initiate the legislative amendments necessary to combat all forms of 
discrimination against lesbian and gay citizens and to provide for the adoption 
of substantial legislation guaranteeing their protection and equal rights with 
the rest of society
take an initiative and declare such reforms as one of the priority in the area 
of human rights in Latvia,

upon the Saeima (Parliament) of the Republic of Latvia to:
include sexual orientation within the list in the paragraph 12 of the 
constitutional law "On Rights and Duties of Citizens and Men" containing the 
grounds on which any forms of discrimination are prohibited,
include sexual orientation in the paragraph 69 of the Criminal Code which 
crminalizes any descrimination on the grounds of race, nationality, thus 
criminalizing  any forms of homophobia,
make the neccessary amendments to the existing legislation in order to equalize 
rights of the homosexual and heterosexual citizens in such areas as family, 
adoption, custody, inheritance, social security, pension, housing, immigration 
and labour law, or to adopt a partnership law containing such provisions,

upon the parliamentary Committee for European Affairs to:
initiate legislative amendments for protection of the homosexuals and euqalizing 
their rights with those of  heterosexual citizens,

upon the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Latvia to:
abolish the questioning of candidates to member of the police force on their 
sexual orientation,
call to administrative responsibility all members of the police force who stir a 
hatred on the ground of sexual orientation,

upon National Human Rights Office to:
declare sexual orientation as one of the priority areas within its activities;
implement research and to advise state authorities how to improve the situation 
of lesbians and gays in Latvia,

upon the Commission of the European Community to:
demand observation of fundamental rights including those of leabians and gays 
during negosiations and actual providing any financial, economical, 
intellectual, informational support to Latvia,
not start negotiations on accession to the European Union with Latvia until 
sufficient systems of safeguarding fundamental rights including those of 
lesbians and gays are provided in Latvia,

upon all other organizations and the addressees of this statement to:
send letters of protest (sample letter attached) concerning the above described 
facts of discrimination of the members of the lesbian and gay community in 
Latvia and to urge Latvia to combat any discrimination on the ground of sexual 
orientation and to equalize homosexual and heterosexual citizens in their rights 
to:

the President of the Republic of Latvia: Pils laukums 3, Riga 50, LV-1900, 
Latvia. Fax: +371 7325800. E-mail: [email-masked]
Saeima (Parliament) of the Republic of Latvia: Jekaba iela 11, Riga, LV-1811, 
Latvia.
Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Latvia: Raina bulvaris 6, Riga, LV-1050, 
Latvia.
Police office of the city of Bauska: Zala iela 12, Bauska, LV-3901. Fax: +371 39 
24335.
HIC: Pastkaste 65, Riga, LV-1001, Latvia. E-mail: [email-masked]

Board of the Homosexuality Information Centre
Riga, 01.10.1997.

===========================
SAMPLE LETTERS
===========================
To the President of the Republic of Latvia
Mr Guntis Ulmanis

Your Excellency,

We, ......., would like to express our concern over the situation faced by 
lesbian women and gay men in Latvia and to ask you to take necessary measures to 
improve their situation.

As we learned from the Statement of the Homosexuality Information Centre in Riga 
"On Homophobia and Intolerance in Latvian Police and Other State Authorities" 
lesbian women and gay men in Latvia suffer discrimination de jure and de facto. 
 Any discrimination against a person based on her/his
homosexual orientation does not currently constitute an unlawful and punishable 
act.  It is not against the law to abuse verbally, persecute physically or in 
any other way treat unequally individuals with homosexual orientation.  Also 
lesbians and gays do not enjoy the same rights as their heterosexual fellow 
citizens.  As the Statement shows the Latvian state
authorities indirectly promote discrimination against homosexual citizens and do 
not interfere in the cases of such discrimination.

Latvia as a member of the United Nations, Council of Europe and as an applicant 
for full membership of the European Union, declared its intention to build a 
society where fundamental rights of each individual are respected and 
guaranteed.  There is significant progress in many countries of Europe and the 
rest of the world regarding protection of lesbian women
and gay men from discrimination and unequal treatment.  Also, such authoritative 
organs as the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the
European Commission and Court of Human Rights, and the European Court of Justice 
demonstrate that discrimination of homosexual women and men is
unacceptable in a democratic society.

Taking into account these facts we call upon you to initiate the legislative 
amendments in Latvia necessary to combat all forms of discrimination against 
lesbian and gay citizens and to provide for the
adoption of substantial legislation guaranteeing their protection and equal 
rights with the rest of society.
......................
To the Saeima (Parliament) of the Republic of Latvia

Highly honoured members of the Saeima,

We, ......., would like to express our concern over the situation faced by 
lesbian women and gay men in Latvia and to ask you to take necessary measures to 
improve their situation.

As we learned from the Statement of the Homosexuality Information Centre in Riga 
"On Homophobia and Intolerance in Latvian Police and Other State Authorities" 
lesbian women and gay men in Latvia suffer discrimination de jure and de facto. 
 Any discrimination against a person based on her/his
homosexual orientation does not currently constitute an unlawful and punishable 
act.  It is not against the law to abuse verbally, persecute physically or in 
any other way treat unequally individuals with homosexual orientation.  Also 
lesbians and gays do not enjoy the same rights as their heterosexual fellow 
citizens.  As the Statement shows the Latvian state
authorities indirectly promote discrimination against homosexual citizens and do 
not interfere in the cases of such discrimination.

Latvia as a member of the United Nations, Council of Europe and as an applicant 
for full membership of the European Union, declared its intention to build a 
society where fundamental rights of each individual are respected and 
guaranteed.  There is significant progress in many countries of Europe and the 
rest of the world regarding protection of lesbian women
and gay men from discrimination and unequal treatment.  Also, such authoritative 
organs as the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the European Commission and 
Court of Human Rights, and the European Court of Justice demonstrate that 
discrimination of homosexual women and men is
unacceptable in a democratic society.

Taking into account these facts we call upon you to:
include sexual orientation within the list of the constitutional law "On Rights 
and Duties of Citizens and Men" containing the grounds on which any forms of 
discrimination are prohibited,
include sexual orientation in the paragraph 69 of the Criminal Code which 
criminalizes any discrimination on the grounds of race and nationality, thus 
criminalizing any forms of homophobia,
make the necessary amendments to the existing legislation in order to equalize 
rights of the homosexual and heterosexual citizens in such areas as family, 
adoption, custody, inheritance, social security, pension, housing, immigration 
and labour law, or to adopt a partnership law containing such provisions.

Check out more information about gay and lesbian situation in Latvia at:
http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/7693

Dutch May Allow Adoptions by Gays
ASSOCIATED PRESS, October 29, 1997
By WILLIAM J. KOLE

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) - Dutch society, renowned for its tolerance of 
homosexuality, is pushing for a federal law that would permit gays and
lesbians to adopt children.

The legislation, which would also sanction same-sex marriages, was approved this 
week by a parliamentary panel. Believed to have broad backing
in Parliament and expected to be enacted early next year, it also gives gay 
couples the same pension, inheritance and social security rights as married
heterosexuals.

"The rights of children in homosexual relationships must be better regulated,'' 
said Bas Kortmann, chairman of the parliamentary panel. He called the bill ``an 
important symbolic step against the old idea that homosexuality is heresy.''

If the current version passes, the Netherlands would become the first country to 
sanction homosexual adoption at the federal level. In the United States, matters 
of marriage and adoption are overseen by states. Some U.S. states allow 
homosexual adoption and a few forbid it.

The Netherlands is known for its acceptance of homosexuals and openness on the 
issue. Homosexuals are welcomed in the Dutch military, and Amsterdam
will hold next year's Gay Games, the quadrennial Olympics-style sports festival.

There didn't appear to be any organized opposition to the legislation. In fact, 
public opinion surveys have shown that seven in 10 Dutch think gays can be good 
parents.

The Dutch Federation for the Integration of Homosexuality hailed the new 
proposal, saying it would stop gay couples from having to lie about their
sexuality in adoption papers. 

Dutch lawmakers had planned to approve a similar bill this year but held off 
because it didn't include adoption rights.

The committee, commissioned by State Justice Secretary Elizabeth Schmitz, said 
most of its members concluded that ``same-sex couples can only
receive equal treatment if they are permitted to enter into civil marriage.''

Marriage "has always been a flexible institution that has kept pace with social 
change,'' the panel said in a report. 

Maarten Jan van Mourik, a law professor at Catholic University of Nijmegen, 
today decried the bill as ``the next step in the abolition of marriage.''

"The creation of a sex-neutral marriage raises the question: Why make marriage 
accessible to just two people? And why not make marriage between a parent and a 
child possible?'' he wrote in a commentary in the daily De Telegraaf.
Homosexual couples already have won the right to register their relationships 
and jointly own property in much of Scandinavia, though Denmark, Norway and 
Sweden have not yet allowed them to adopt.

The Dutch panel conceded that legalizing gay marriage and adoption in the 
Netherlands could lead to "international complications'' for Dutch gays and 
lesbians who move with their adoptive children to countries hostile to the idea.

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ESTABLISHES INTERGROUP ON GAY AND LESBIAN ISSUES
By Egalité

At the European Parliament on 22 October, four political groups from across the 
political spectrum  decided to join forces to develop a structured approach to 
gay and lesbian issues in EU policy and administration. 

The European Parliament, the only democratically elected institution of the 
European Union, has been consistently supportive of lesbian and gay rights over
the past few years.  The 1993 "Roth Report" written by German Green Member of 
the European Parliament (MEP) and EGALITE Prize-winner, Claudia Roth, was the 
first comprehensive treatment of the question of gay and lesbian rights in 
Europe.  It laid the foundations for an agenda of reforms and legislation which 
is still being pursued by MEPs with the support of EGALITE and the members of 
ILGA-Europe.  Implementation of Roth's report is going slowly, but concrete 
steps have been the inclusion of provisions in the Amsterdam Treaty to combat 
discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, and the Parliament's 
adoption of the "Lindholm Report" earlier this year.

The establishment of a Parliamentary Intergroup on equal rights for lesbians and 
gays is a further step forward and another sign of the European Parliament's 
commitment to our cause.  An Intergroup provides a forum at which MEPs with a
special interest in a particular issue can discuss how to press forward an 
agenda at the EU level.  It also helps MEPs to draw on the advice and experience
of interested European citizens.  

The inaugural meeting of the Intergroup was chaired by Mrs. Outi Ojala, a 
Finnish MEP with a record in the Finnish Parliament which includes numerous
motions and a draft bill on registration rights for same-sex couples.  She is a 
member of the United European Left/Nordic Green Left group which is one of the 
moving forces behind this initiative.  But the Intergroup has received support 
across the political spectrum, and includes Socialists, Greens and Christian 
Democrats.

The new Intergroup will meet monthly in Strasbourg and invite experts, national 
representatives and officials from other EU institutions to discuss topics such 
as the status of lesbians and gays in national and EU legislation and 
policy-making, existing discrimination and possible steps to promote equal 
treatment.  Its prime goal will be to assist the European Parliament in its work 
on this issues, but it will of course facilitate coordination and exchange of
information in a broader European context.

At the next meeting on 19 November, Commissioner Flynn will be invited to 
discuss how the new Treaty article 6a, which enables the EU to combat 
discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, can be put into practice. 
On that occasion, the Intergroup will formally request the Commission to appoint 
both a Commissioner and a Commission official responsible for gay and lesbian 
issues. This would put an end to the juggling-around of matters that concern our 
position in society and would finally offer gay and lesbian representatives the 
chance to address their input to a clear-cut authority with the required mandate 
to take action. In December, the agenda will focus on immigration rules and
Interpol.

EGALITE will be playing an active role in the Intergroup, and the ILGA-Europe 
Conference decided in October that the Executive Board should appoint an 
ILGA-Europe representative to be in permanent liaison with the Intergroup.

To contact the Intergroup: Paola Giaculli - Intergroup Secretary 
([email-masked]).

SYMBOLIC DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP IN HAMBURG
By Christoph Hebling and Reinhard Sass

After the recent elections a domestic partnership for gays and lesbians is 
introduced in the coalition agreement of the new government in the Bundesland 
Hamburg. It is expected to take effect from the beginning of the new year The 
partnership is only of symbolic character. Within the coalition treaty it is 
stated that  there are to be registered partnerships but also that no positiv or 
negative consequences should derive thereof.

It is also only possible to get registered in the registry office if  the couple 
is holding a partnership certificate issued by a notary, which costs usually a 
fortune, depending on the wealth of the involved parties. 

***************************
Steffen Jensen
E-mail: [email-masked] 
http://inet.uni2.dk/~steff
Tel. +45 3324 6435 or +45 2033 0840  Fax: +45 2036 7856