Subject: EuroLetter 59
From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 23:15:22 +0200 (METDST)

EURO-LETTER 

No. 59						April 1998

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  A French
summary is avaiable at www.france.qrd.org  You can find a link
to Euro-Letters at http://www.inet.uni2.dk/~steff 

IN THIS ISSUE
EU FUNDED GAY/LESBIAN PROJECTS
IDEAS ON HOW TO FOLLOW UP ON THE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION CLAUSE IN
THE NEW EU TREATY
ILGA-EUROPE JOINS THE PINK TRIANGLE COALITION
AUSTRIA: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW ENFORCED
CYPRUS ARCHBISHOP BLASTS EURO-COURT ON GAY SEX
CYPRUS PARLIAMENT DELAYS GAY DEBATE TILL AFTER EASTER
DUTCH PARLIAMENT REPEATS CALLS FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND
ADOPTION - BUT STILL NO LEGISLATION
GERMAN LAWS & REGULATIONS
UK: GAY SEX AT 16 TO BE LEGAL BY SUMMER
ACCEPT's PROPOSED NEW LEGISLATION (ROMANIA)

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

Consolidated versions of the basic treaties of the European
Union including amendments from the Amsterdam Treaty can be
found at this web-site:
http://ue.eu.int/Amsterdam/en/traiteco/en1.htm

************************************
EU FUNDED GAY/LESBIAN PROJECTS
By Steffen Jensen

ILGA-Europe is trying to establish an overview over all EU
funded projects with a lesbian and or gay perspective - or other
EU funded projects carried out by lesbian/gay organisations.

So, if you know of any such project, please do contact
ILGA-Europe's board either at e-mail adress: [email-masked] or
by mail to the editor of EuroLetter (see adress above).

IDEAS ON HOW TO FOLLOW UP ON THE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION CLAUSE IN
THE NEW EU TREATY
By Steffen Jensen

According to article 13 (originally article 6a) in the proposed
new treaty of the European Union, the Commission can take
initiatives to combat discri- mination based on - inter alia -
sexual orientation within the areas of competencies of the
Community.

ILGA-Europe's board will follow closely the imple- mentation of
this article and will also itself present the Commission with
ideas on how to do so.

If you have any ideas, please do contact ILGA- Europe's board
either at e-mail adress: [email-masked] or by mail to the
editor of EuroLetter (see adress above).

ILGA-EUROPE JOINS THE PINK TRIANGLE COALITION
By Kurt Krickler

At a two-day meeting held in Berlin, 21-22 February 1998, the
"Pink Triangle Coalition - An International Coalition for
Co-ordinating Affairs Related to the Nazi Persecution of Gay Men
and Lesbians" was informally established by representatives of
the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission
(IGLHRC), the World Congress of Gay and Lesbian Jewish
Organisations (WCGLJO), ILGA-Europe, Pink Cross (Switzerland),
and Homosexuelle Initiative (HOSI) Wien (Austria). Several
German scientists and researchers also attended the meeting but
no representative from "Schwulenverband in Deutschland", the
national German gay organisation, which will also be invited to
join the Coalition, as will be the International Organisation of
Lesbian/Gay Children of Survivors. There are no plans for the
time being, however, to make the Coalition into a formal
organisation.

The main purpose of the Coalition is to represent the gay and
lesbian interests and concerns vis-…-vis the two recently
established funds, e.g., the "Swiss Fund for Needy Victims of
the Holocaust/Shoah" and the "International Fund for Needy
Victims of Nazi Persecution" set up in the context of the London
Conference on Nazi Gold in December 1997 by the British
Government and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. While the
Swiss Fund is fed by monies (275 million CHF) provided by the
Swiss Government and Swiss banks (not to confuse with the funds
in "ownerless accounts" in Swiss banks), the International Fund
will be fed by money given by donor countries which can also
have a say how to use their donations.

ILGA-Europe member Pink Cross is represented in the respective
body of the Swiss Fund, established in February 1997. Pink Cross
is also dealing with applications from gay men (and hopefully
lesbians) because individual claims cannot be made directly to
the Fund but only through one of the organisations representing
victim groups. Until today, five gay men persecuted by the Nazis
have filed applications to the Swiss Fund via Pink Cross. All
five have been granted financial assistance, e.g., 2,000 CHF
each, which is not really a huge sum.

It was, however, not so easy to establish a gay/lesbian
representation at the "International Fund". Therefore, there
have already been contacts between WCGLJO, IGLHRC, ILGA-Europe
and Pink Cross in late summer 1997 in order to establish an
international coalition, and this "Coalition", which had no name
yet at that time, approached the London Conference on Nazi Gold
in the beginning of December 1997. WCGLJO and "Coalition"
representative Jack Gilbert, however, was refused to attend the
London Conference. Therefore, the persecution of gays and
lesbians in the Nazi era was completely ignored by the
conference. That's why the Coalition has prepared a Paper -
titled "Nazi Persecution of Gay Men and Lesbians" - to be
included in the Final Report of the London Conference on Nazi
Gold. In order to have it included, this Paper had to be
submitted by another NGO that attended the meeting. This was
done by the European Jewish Congress.

Another issue with the International Fund is to get the Pink
Triangle Coalition on the Annex B List of Recognised NGOs for
the purposes of the fund as established in London. The purpose
is twofold: 1. to support "needy" victims individually, and 2.
to support education about the Holocaust/Shoah. Each donor
country will designate how they wish their contribution to be
distributed but only to the NGOs on this list. The Coalition
will now have to convince at least one donor country to request
the Coalition to be added to this Annex B List. And for that,
the Coalition must convince this country that it is in a
position to distribute monies under those two criteria. To
complicate things, Pink Cross is already on this list but, of
course, the Coalition is striving to get on the list as such.

In this context, ILGA-Europe is looking for needy victims of the
Nazi regime, "needy" meaning that they leave below or just at
poverty line in their country. There are great chances that
their applications will be accepted at both Funds. Additionally,
we invite ILGA-Europe members to come forward with proposals for
educational projects on the Holocaust/Shoah (exhibitions,
seminars, lectures, commemorative sites, etc.) which could be
submitted especially to the International Fund.

More information is available from Kurt Krickler, HOSI Wien,
Novaragasse 40, A-1020 Vienna; Tel./Fax: +43-1-5451310; e-mail:
[email-masked]

AUSTRIA: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW ENFORCED
by Helmut Graupner, Rechtskomitee LAMBDA, Vienna

While Austria in its Criminal law still discriminates against
gay men (Art .209 CC) it absurdly prohibits its police from
discriminating against gay men and lesbians. A decree under the
Police Act 1993 makes it illegal for members of Austrian police
forces in executing their powers to (even) produce the
impression of discrimination on the basis of ,sexual
orientation" (Art. 5 Decree of Directions 1993).

Last year this anti-discrimination law has been enforced for the
first time. In 1995 a police officer as part of a routine drug
control searched the car of a gay men and found erotic gay
literature. This caused him to ask the man if he would have
already intended to contact a physician for his sexual
inclinations.

The man outraged about this discrimination with the assistance
of Rechtskomitee LAMBDA filed a complaint to the Vienna
Independent Administrative Senate which in October 97 declared
the remarks illegal.

CYPRUS ARCHBISHOP BLASTS EURO- COURT ON GAY SEX
By Jean Christou, Cyprus Mail 8 April 1998

ARCHBISHOP Chrysostomos yesterday launched a scorching attack on
homosexuality and Europe as Cyprus was given a final stay of
execution on changing its antiquated laws prohibiting gay sex.

In Strasbourg, the Council of Europe (CoE) said the government
had until next month to comply with a 1993 European Court of
Human Rights ruling to decriminalise homosexuality.

Speaking from Strasbourg, Cyprus's permanent representative at
the CoE, Thalia Petridou, said if the law was not changed in May
there would be repercussions because the government will have
run out of excuses for postponing it.

But in Nicosia Archbishop Chrysostomos, leader of the Greek
Orthodox Church in Cyprus, laughed in an interview with a CyBC
TV journalist as he openly derided homosexuality and the
European ruling.

He said only "enemies of our nation" would endorse
decriminalisation of homosexual acts.

"If we don't stand firm and tell Europe this does not conform,
not only to Christ's religion, but also to the moral standpoint
of our nation, eventually they will come and tell us to be
homosexuals in order to be accepted into Europe," Chrysostomos
said.

"If you go and say it's all right to be a homosexual you will
encourage it and the place will be full of homosexuals".

The Archbishop said he not only didn't believe homosexuality to
be a human right, but that in his opinion it was a "trampling on
human rights".

"It is a violation both of the laws of the Creator God and the
laws of nature. God made males and females for the reproduction
both of animals and humans. Homosexuality is against the purpose
of creation," Chrysostomos said.

Quoting the Bible, he said the Kingdom of Heaven would not be
inherited by "whores nor idolators" and added that St Paul
clearly referred to homosexuality as a curse.

"The Church considers decriminalisation (of homosexual acts) to
be against what is holy and against human dignity... and this
while we are waging a tough war for our national and religious
survival," Chrysostomos said.

Gay rights activist Alecos Modinos, who won the 1993 case
against Cyprus at the European Court, told the Cyprus Mail last
night the Archbishop should think before he speaks.

"He's still stuck on the Adam and Eve business," Modinos said.
"Of course, it's not for us to dispute what he believes but he
is in a position of authority and he must be more careful and
act more wisely before expressing his opinion."

Modinos said he was glad Cyprus was given another stay of
execution and that no disciplinary action had been taken in
Strasbourg yesterday. "We were lucky to get another month," he
said. "But there will be no more chances and they (the
government) know it."

The bill has still to face the uphill battle of being approved
by the House Legal Affairs Committee, which for years has
baulked at the task in the face of public and Church opposition.

Attorney-general Alecos Markides has repeatedly told deputies
that Cyprus has no choice but to comply with the European
Court's ruling.

He warned that the island's failure to do so would have
repercussions on pending cases by Greek Cypriot refugees against
Turkey.
Copyright Cyprus Mail 1998

CYPRUS PARLIAMENT DELAYS GAY DEBATE TILL AFTER EASTER
By Jean Christou, Cyprus Mail 9 April 1998

PARLIAMENTARY debate on decriminalising homosexuality will not
begin until after Easter despite a May deadline from Europe,
House President Spyros Kyprianou said yesterday.

Kyprianou said the first step would be a meeting of party
leaders to make their positions clear to members who would be
seeing through the changes at the House Legal Affairs Committee.

But reports yesterday said the Church which launched a scathing
attack on Europe over the issue on Tuesday had sent letters to
all deputies calling on them to vote against the changes.

The Council of Europe (CoE) has given Cyprus a last chance to
comply with a 1993 European Court of Human Rights decision to
decriminalise the island's gay laws.

Cyprus has only until next month to comply or face serious
repercussions, which could include expulsion from the CoE.

Deputies have procrastinated over the issue for years in the
face of public and Church opposition. Previous attempts to
approve the bill were met by demonstrations outside the House
and threats that parties would lose votes.

Further demonstrations are likely when the bill does come up for
discussion after Easter.

The Holy Synod's letter to deputies is understood to call on
them to resist the bill "as a matter of honour".

"The Church condemns homosexuality as a sinful act because it is
contrary to the spirit of Scripture and of natural law," the
letter is quoted as saying.

It is also believed to express "sorrow" for those "who have been
dragged into the sad position of homosexuality", and calls on
them to repent.

On Tuesday, Archbishop Chrysostomos said: "If we don't stand
firm and tell Europe this does not correspond, not only with
Christ's religion, but also the moral standpoint of our nation,
eventually they will come and tell us to be homosexuals in order
to be accepted into Europe." 

Attorney-general Alecos Markides has told deputies that Cyprus
has no choice but to comply with the European decision.

He has warned that failure to do so will have repercussions on
outstanding cases in Europe brought by Greek Cypriot refugees
against Turkey.
Copyright Cyprus Mail 1998

DUTCH PARLIAMENT REPEATS CALLS FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND
ADOPTION - BUT STILL NO LEGISLATION
By Kees Waaldijk

On 16 April 1998, the Lower Chamber of the Dutch Parliament for
the second time passed resolutions demanding legislation opening
up marriage and adoption to same-sex couples (the first time was
on 16 April 1996).The adoption-resolution is in agreement with
the Government's position (on 6 February 1998 it announced that
it is preparing a legislative proposal). The
marriage-resolution, however, disagrees with the Government,
which on 6 February 1998 stated that it would not prepare such
legislation. Both resolutions call for a proposal to be
submitted to Parliament before January 1999 (which in Dutch
circumstances implies extreme haste, and which just might make
it possible to have the first same-sex marriages in 2000). 

Parliamentary resolutions in the Netherlands are not binding on
Government, and certainly do not create law. Furthermore, the
resolutions were passed on the last day of the present
Parliament. On 6 May 1998 there will be general elections. After
that, coalition talks will need to be held, and even if the
present liberal/social-democratic coalition is continued, it is
far from certain that marriage legislation will form part of the
new Government's programme (after all, the leaders of the main
parties are on record as being opposed to same-sex marriage). If
the christian-democrats get to make a coalition with liberals or
social-democrats, a governmental proposal to open up marriage
would be even more unlikely. In all events, lesbian and gay
couples will have to make do in the coming years with
"registered partnership" in stead of full marriage, and with
"joint authority" or "joint custody" over their children in
stead of full adoption (these three new legal institutions came
into force on 1 January 1998, for deails see my piece of 8
February 1998 at http://www.xs4all.nl/~nvihcoc/marriage.html ).

In 1996 the marriage-resolution gained a majority of 81 against
60 votes. In 1998 it gained a majority of 81 against 56 votes.
The adoption-resolution, however, increased its majority from 83
against 58 in 1996 to 95 against 42 in 1998.

GERMAN LAWS & REGULATIONS
By Colin de la Motte-Sherman

The Office for Same-Sex Life-Styles in Berlin - which is part of
the Senatsverwaltung f�r Schule, Jugend und Sport - after
sending out questionnaires to the relevant authorities in other
provinces has produced a document entitled 

Multikulturelle Gesellschaft und Lebensvielfalt (Multicultural
Society and Life-styles) about "Antidiskriminierungsregelungen
and Initiativen zur Gleichstellung von Minderheiten in den
Bundeslaendern". [Anti discrimination regulations and laws on the
equality of minorities in the federal provinces.] It also deals
with matters at national level. 

FURTHER, about eight pages (of 40) directly describe the current
situation for gays and lesbians in the provinces and intentions
for the future. 

The summary includes:
"5.1.4: Right of residence for foreign partners in same-sex
long-term partnerships

In the federal provinces of Hamburg, Hessen and
North-Rhine-Westphalia the conditions are being created and
criteria developed, which would permit foreigners, who live in a
long-term bi-national same-sex partnership, under certain
conditions can be given the right of residence. Thus the reality
that there are bi-national couples and various court decisions
which make the conduct of such a partnership in Germany
possible, would be taken into account.

The Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Court of Administration)
in its judgement of 27.2.1996 laid down that within the
framework of discretionary decisions according to the
Auslaendergesetz (Law on Foreign Citizens), it should be taken
into account, that respect for the private life is included in
the areas protected by the (German, C.M-S) Constitution and the
European Convention on Human Rights."

This leaves long-term bi-national couples in other provinces
without much hope except to find a "willing woman" and get
married - which is only possible for couples "mixed" couples -
in order to be able to stay in Germany.
(The translation is unofficial.)

UK: GAY SEX AT 16 TO BE LEGAL BY SUMMER
By Andrew Pierce, The Times, April 16, 1998

HOMOSEXUAL sex for 16-year-olds should be legalised by the
summer after a decision to give MPs a free vote on the issue
next month. 

The Labour backbencher Ann Keen is to table an amendment to the
Crime and Disorder Bill to bring the age of consent in line with
heterosexuals and, with the huge number of new Labour MPs, the
measure is bound to have a big majority. 

The amendment is being tabled with the approval of Jack Straw
and Tony Blair, but it threatens to put the Government on a
collision course with the Church and the House of Lords. Some
peers are particularly concerned that the move could leave young
men open to exploitation. 

All three party leaders will back the change, but it will
isolate William Hague within the Tory high command. Mr Hague
will be one of only a handful of Shadow Cabinet members voting
to change the age of consent to 16 and a group of Tory MPs may
table a rival amendment to take it back to 21. 

Julian Brazier, the Tory MP for Canterbury who is president of
the Conservative Family Campaign, will lead the Opposition on
the back benches. He said: "We will lose the vote but can win
the argument. A lot of us do not accept the argument for
homosexual and heterosexual equality. Boys are less mature than
girls. Young people are becoming more and more vulnerable to
predatory males. We will oppose this because of the
sexualisation and exploitation of young people." 

Opponents of the change within the Government include Ann
Taylor, Leader of the Commons, and David Blunkett, the Education
Secretary, who argue that the issue would be best dealt with by
a specific vote with legislation in the next Queen's Speech.
That would have delayed the change for at least a year. 

Both Mrs Taylor and Mr Blunkett voted against setting the age of
consent at 16 when the issue was debated in 1994. Then there
were violent scenes outside the Commons as MPs reduced the age
of consent from 21 to 18 but decided by 27 votes not legalise
homosexual sex for 16-year-olds. 

That decision was held last year to be discriminatory by the
European Human Rights Commission, which said the age of consent
should be the same for both homosexuals and heterosexuals. 

In spite of that ruling, the change is likely to meet strong
resistance. The Bishop of Norwich, the Right Rev Peter Nott, is
expected to speak against the amendment in the Lords. He said:
"I am entirely behind the Archbishop of Canterbury. The bishops'
statement is clear: there are two norms. One is marriage and one
is celibacy. The church has been consistent on that." 

Asked whether the Lords would defy a large Commons majority, the
bishop  replied: "Knowing the way the House of Lords works
people will vote according to their conscience." 

Nicholas Coote, the assistant general secretary of the Roman
Catholic bishops of England and Wales, also deprecated the move.
He said: "The Roman Catholic Church has a clear position:
homosexual acts are morally wrong. If we lower the age of
consent, we open boys and girls to the possibility of
exploitation. If there must be an equal age of consent it should
be raised to 18 not lowered to 16. But I fear opinion has moved
the other way." 

The Earl of Onslow, a Tory backbench peer, said that he would
oppose any  reduction in the age of consent. While he was
relaxed at the thought of homosexual sex between two 16-year-old
boys, he was concerned at the possibility of youngsters being
taken advantage of by older homosexuals. "I think that 18 was a
perfectly satisfactory compromise," he said. "I see no need to
change it." 

ACCEPT's PROPOSED NEW LEGISLATION (ROMANIA)

Draft bill for the modification of the Penal Code provisions
relating to sex life.

ACCEPT has submitted to the Ministry of Justice a draft Bill for
the abolition of Art. 200 of the Penal Code and for the
modification of the other articles of the chapter "Sex-related
criminal offences" so that the punishment for rape, sexual
relations with minors and sexual molestation no longer depends
on the sexual orientation of the offender.

The idea of submitting such a draft bill belongs to Manuela
Stefanescu, member of ACCEPT and co-president of APADOR-CH.
Scott Long, member of ACCEPT and Advocacy Co-ordinator of
IGLHRC, with his well-known enthusiasm and knowledge has drafted
the initial text of this Bill. The work was completed by Monica
Macovei - lawyer and author of several draft Bills - who
supported this draft Bill at the ACCEPT press Conference on 6th
March 1998, asking the Romanian and overseas organisations to
show the Romanian authorities that abolishing Art. 200 means
something more than a 'favour' shown to Romanians who dare to
love in a different way.

We thank everybody for the enthusiasm and dedication they have
shown by working for this draft Bill.

A. Rationale
By means of Resolution 1123 of 24 April 1997, the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe decided a) to cease monitoring
the way Romania respects the obligations it has committed itself
to upon becoming a fully-fledged member of the Council of
Europe; b) to resume monitoring if within one year after the
adoption of the Resolution the Romanian State does not fulfil
the conditions explictly mentioned in this document.

Point 9 of the Resolution refers to the modification of Art. 200
of the Penal Code, while the Jansson Report, on the basis of
which the Resolution was adopted, provides explicitly for the
complete repeal of this text.

The present draft Bill meets the requirements of the
Parliamentary Assembly and sets out to adapt the penal law both
to reality and the European norms in the field. Acceptance of
diversity is an essential feature of a democratic society. The
European Human Rights Court has consistently applied this
principle since the case of Dudgeon against Northern Ireland, in
1981, constantly developing its case-law towards
decriminalisation of same-sex relations as a requirement of
modern society.

In applying the constitutional principle of non-discrimination
on account of sex, not only does the draft Bill propose
decriminalisation of same-sex relations between consenting
adults, but also the adoption of unique penal provisions for
situations where sexual relations are situated outside the law
(coercion or minor age) irrespective of the partners' sex. In
this context, the draft Bill provides a definition of sexual
relations in order to eliminate misinterpretations and to
include all possible situations, thus preventing the penal law
from being used in an abusive manner.

The authors have also tried to comply with the need to respect
constiutional rights to freedom of expression and association as
well as the prinicple of non-discrimination, requirements that
have led to repealing the infringement of these rights in
connection with same-sex relations.

In order to protect minors, irrespective of their sex, the draft
Bill suggests modifications of the penal law in the sense of
raising the age-limit for victims of any kind of sexual abuse
and of broadening the range of situations in which minors are
considered to be sexually assaulted, expanding thus the scope of
criminal liability in this field.

The draft Bill provides a complete reformulation of Title II,
Chapter III: "Sex-related offences" of the Penal Code, unifying
and co-ordinating the legal texts.

To conclude, this draft Bill attempts to cover from the
perspective of penal law a broad range of sexual relations and
to bring Romanian legislation up to date with European standards
and the requirements of a civilised modern society where
individual rights are genuinely observed.

B. Title II Criminal offences against individuals 

Chapter III - Sex-related offences

Art. 197 "Rape"
Paragraph 1 shall be modified to read as follows:

"Sexual relations with a person unable to defend him/herself, to
express his/her will or by coercion shall by punished by
imprisonment for between 3 and 10 years.

Par. 2 remains as follows:
"Punishment shall be imprisonment for between 5 and 15 years if:
- the act was perpetrated by two or more persons acting together;
- the victim was placed under the perpetrator's care, or
- the victim's health or physical integrity was seriously harmed."

Par. 3 shall be modified to read as follows:
"The punishment shall be imprisonment for between 10 and 20
years where the victim was under 15 years old. Where the act
resulted in the victim's death or suicide, the punishment shall
be imprisonment for between 15 and 25 years."

Par. 4 remains as follows:
"Investigations into the offence under par. 1 shall start only
upon the complaint of the alleged victim."

Par. 5 shall be replaced by the following:
"Sexual relations shall be defined under the penal law as the
inserion of a penis into a vagina, anal or oral cavity, as well
as the insertion of any foregn object into the vagina or anal
cavity."

Article 198: The title shall be amended from "sexual relations
with a minor girl" to "sexual relations with minor persons"

Par. 1 shall be modified to read as follows:
"Sexual relations with a person under 15 shall be punished by
imprisonment for between 1 and 5 years."

Par. 2 shall be modified to read as follows:
"The same punishment shall apply to sexual relations with
persons aged between 15 and 18 where perpetrated by the tutor or
guardian, or by a person who takes care of or is in charge of
the alleged victim, the personal doctor, teacher or trainer, by
availing himself of this position."

Par. 3 shall be modified to read as follows:
"When the acts defined by Pars. 1 and 2 have the consequences
specified in Art. 197 par. 2 letter c), then the punishment
shall be improsonment for between 3 and 12 years."

Par. 4 remains unchanged and reads as follows:
"If the act resulted in the victim's death, the punishment shall
be imprisonment for between 7 and 15 years."

Article 200 - Same-sex relations - shall be entirely repealed.

Article 201 - Acts of sexual perversity - shall be entirely
repealed.

Article 202 shall be re-titled from "Sexual corruption" to
"sexual molestation". The text of the single Paragraph shall be
modified to read as follows:
"Any person who sexually touches a child under 15 or exposes
himself to such a child in an offensive manner or induces the
child to undertake or participate in an act with sexual
implications, other than by committing any of the offences
defined in the preceding Articles of this Chapter, shall be
punished by imprisonment for between one month and two years or
by a fine."

Article 203 - Incest - shall remain unchanged

Article 204 - Attempts - shall be modified to read as follows:
"Attempts to commit the crimes defined under Articles 197, 198,
202 and 203 shall be punished." [sic]

C  -  Explanations and technical notes 

Article 197 - "Rape" - 
Paragraph 1 introduces the phrase 'sexual relations' to cover
all sexual acts irrepective of the participants' sex. The
current penal provisions use three different phrases (sexual
intercourse, sexual relation and acts of sexual perversity) to
distinguish between "normal" and "abnormal" acts, both with
regard to the type of sexual acts and the particpants. We
eliminate this distinction because it does not agree with
reality and it runs counter to the principle of
non-discrimination on account of sex.

The phrase "sexual relations" is defined in Par. 5 and used
consistently throughout Chapter III. 

Par. 2 is not modified

Par. 3 contains a single modification: the victim's age-limit is
raised from 14 to 15 years. The 14-year age-limit is one of the
lowest in Europe. Thus children of both sexes enjoy increased
protection. At present, even family law sets 15 years as the
minimum "age of consent" for girls (with special licence,
departing from the age-limit of 16). This proves that sexual
relations under 15 years old are considered harmful for health,
causing more serious damages; de lege ferenda, the minimum age
for consent  should be the same for men and women, but this
matter exceeds the aims of the present draft Bill. However, it
is obvious that the 14-year-old limit does not concur with
medical conceptions regarding the physiological capacity to have
sexual intercourse; consequently the aggravated form of rape
should be related to an age superior to fourteen. 

Paragraph 4 is not modified

Paragraph 5 is completely repealed. The current proviso
according to which the perpetrator who marries the victim will
not be punished gives the impression that rape is a crime
against honour (which can be nullified by marriage), rather than
a crime of violence. In fact, the repeal of this provision is
welcomed by women victims of rape, who have been subject to
pressure to get married without their full consent. Such
marriages are usually doomed to failure, becasuse they are
founded on a violent act instead of mutual understanding. The
provision currently allows persons to commit violent acts with
impunity and does noting to help the victims. Other European
States do not have similar legal texts.

The new paragraph 5 defines 'sexual relations' - see the
comments regarding par. 1.  The proposed text is based on a
definition provided by Human Rights Watch - Women's Rights
Project.

Article 198 - "Sexual intercourse with a minor"
Title: is changed to "Sexual relations with minor persons" in
order to cover potential victims of both sexes.

Paragraphs 1 and 2: the minimum age of consent is raised from 14
to 15 years - see the comments on Article 197 Par. 3. "Sexual
intercourse" is replaced by "sexual relations" - see the
comments on Article 197 Par. 1.

Paragraph 3: The first part, which duplicates the provision of
Article 198, is deleted.

Paragraph 4: remains without modification.

Paragraph 5: is completely repealed. This eliminates the current
proviso according to which the perpetrator who marries the
victim will not be punished - see the comments on Article 197
par. 5. As an additional legal argument, penal incrimination is
aimed at protecting minors' health, which cannot be restored by
a marriage between the offender and the victim.

Article 199 - "Enticement"
This Article is completely repealed. Sexual relations with a
person under 15 are already made punishable by Article 198 of
the Penal Code. With regard to persons between 15 and 18 years
old, according to civil law girls are regarded as having the
capacity to engage in contractual relations - including marriage
- from the age of 16 (15 with special licence). It is therefore
evident that young persons are sufficiently mature to determine
whether or not to consent freely to sexual relations at that age.

Article 200 - "Same-sex relations"
This Article is completely repealed, as the necessary protection
is now provided by the amendments made to the provisions of the
other Articles, so that they now apply regardles of the sex of
the parties concerned. This complies with the principle of
non-discrimination on grounds of sex.

The act formerly made punishable by Par. 1 is covered adequately
by the provisions of Article 321. The phase "public scandal" has
been criticised by the Council of Europe (in the Jansson Report)
and by the european parlaiment, as well as by all national and
international organisations involved in the human rights field
(see the Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports). 
Due to the vague wording and hazy contents, this notion has been
abosed in judicial practice. It is discriminatory, because it
does not apply to hetehrosexual relations, although they produce
identical effects. Furthermore, it is unnecessary so long as
persons performing sexual acts in public are liable to
punishment under other texts of the Penal Code and Law 61/1991.
The acts made punishable under pars. 2-4 are already included in
the proposed revisions of Article 197 et seq. The present
differences on the punishment applicable are discriminatory and
unjustified.

Article 201 - "Acts of sexual perversity"
This article is completely repealed - see the comments on Art.
197 par. 1."Abnormal" sexual acts are included within the
definition of "sexual relations" in order to respect the right
to private and intimate life, and anybody performing them by
coercion, by violence or against minor persons unable to give
valid consent are liable to punishment under the preceding
articles. The performance of such acts in public is already
punishable under the provisions of Article 321 of the Penal Code
and under by-laws - see the comments on Article 200 par. 1.

Article 202 - "Sexual corruption"
The title is changed to "Sexual molestation", because this
corresponds to its provisions. The single paragraph is modified
by introducing the age-limit of 15 for consent - see the
previous comments on this age-limit. The scope of the provisions
is extended and the nature of the possible offences is defined
more explictly, in order to ensure that it will be enforced
correctly. The existing text did not provide adequate protection
for young people and the new wording is based on the
corresponding provision in the Swedish penal law.

Article 203 - "Incest"
This is retained without modification.           

Article 204 - "Attempts"
This is modified to refer to the relevant articles.

D - Recommendations regarding other texts in the Penal Code

Article 325, with the title "Dissemination of obscene
materials", is too vague and general; there is a risk that it
may be applied abusively and inconsistently because the word
"obscene" is not defined. Its enforcement may lead to
unjustified violations of freedom of expression. We propose that
this article be repealed and that the provision should be
transferred to a liability under by-laws.

Article 312, with the title "Outrage against decency and
disturbance of the peace", is also vaguely worded and has often
been enforced abusively (eg the "University Square" cases). The
existing Penal Code provision overlaps with [by-laws]; we
propose that this Article should be repleaded and that the
offence should be clearly defined and enforced excusively under
by-laws.

Sexual harassment does not at present come within the scope of
any provisions in Romanian legislation, but it could be the
subject of a new Article in Title II, Chapter III of the Penal
Code: "Sex-related criminal offences".

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