THEGAYUK

Tag: Legal

Read the latest news and analysis of legal issues surrounding the LGBT+ community. Browse THEGAYUK’s entire archive on news on legal issues.

  • Man arrested in Dubai for touching another man’s hip

    A man is facing financial ruin after being arrested and detained in Dubai following a misunderstanding.

    A Scottish man has been arrested and detained in Dubai after falling foul of Dubai’s strict public decency laws. According to DetainedInDubai.org, Jamie Harron was arrested after touching the hip of another man in a crowded bar.

    Jamie was in Dubai, with a friend, on a two-day stopover from Afghanistan, where he works as an electrician.

    Jamie, originally from Stirling in Central Scotland, says he was trying to ensure that a drink he was holding did not spill on himself or others. He touched the other man’s hip in order to avoid an impact.

    He was arrested for public indecency and his passport was seized but authorities. In fighting his case, Jamie has spent in excess of £30,000 in legal fees. He has spent all of his savings and spent £12,000 on credit cards.

    A misunderstanding that has cost him the earth

    According to DetainedInDubai, after Jamie had purchased his drink in at the Rock Bottom Bar in Dubai, he noticed a Jordanian man who was looking over at him from the edge of the dance floor in a confrontational manner.

    In order to get to the other side of the bar, Jamie had to pass the man and in doing so, placed his hand on the right-hand side of the man’s hip top to ensure that when passing they didn’t bump and spill drinks in a move familiar to most UK patrons of crowded pubs. There was no intention to upset the man in any way. The man said nothing and didn’t show any reaction.

    Jamie and his friend relaxed for another 20-30 minutes chatting when suddenly, the police appeared outside the bar. The man went out to meet them, and he began animatedly talking with them, pointing at Jamie. Jamie got up and went to see what the problem was.

    The man, his friends and the police were all speaking in Arabic. The accuser occasionally shouting in English, “he’s been drinking, and he touched me improperly, I will get you deported, do you know who I am?”

    The police asked Jamie to apologise which he gladly did to the man. The man was not mollified and urged the police to arrest Jamie; Jamie was arrested and in and out of jail for the next 8 days with no idea of the charge. He was held in the Al Barsha prison, where he was allegedly prohibited to wash or brush his teeth.

    It was only after a meeting with a  prosecutor that Jamie learned that charges against him were twofold, drinking alcohol and “public Indecency.” Jamie denies this latter charge vehemently, restating that his only intention was to avoid spilling a drink.

    Radha Stirling, CEO of Detained In Dubai, the British based NGO who is leading the campaign to help Jamie, released the following statement: “I have spoken to Jamie today who is under immense pressure and stress. He was expecting to appear in court this Sunday, the 6th of October but the court moved the date without telling him or his lawyer. This led to a sentence of 30 days imprisonment for failing to present himself at the hearing”.

    Jamie said in a phone call to Stirling “Of course if I had known there was a change in the court date, I would have been there. I have been waiting for months to appear and now it looks as though I will be arrested when I go to the hearing on Sunday. It is completely unfair and I can’t understand how I can be sentenced for failing to appear when I was not even informed of the hearing”.

    Vulnerable tourists

    Ms Stirling continued, “Jamie has been advised by his lawyer that he is at high risk of being jailed for a duration of up to three years. It is quite outrageous that he has been held in the country for so long already. This is another example of how vulnerable tourists are to arrest and detention in Dubai and at how drawn out and disorganised legal proceedings are.

    “We have received a wave of new cases of British nationals detained in Dubai and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office need to increase travel warnings to citizens intending to visit or live in the country. If Jamie is sentenced to prison, he faces human rights violations and torture. The English High Court has ruled against extradition to the UAE based on the ‘very real risk of unfair trials and torture’ but the UK government has refused to increase warnings, largely due to their financial and diplomatic ties with the UAE”.

    Tourists who consume alcohol at licensed venues can still be arrested for having alcohol in their system; Most tourists are not aware of this fact. A number of British nationals have been caught out by this contradictory application of the law.

    Both Jamie and his family are anxious for him to be back home in Stirling, Scotland as soon as possible.

    27-year-old Jamie has been held in the UAE since the 15th of July 2017.

     

  • What Law Says About Gay Men Donating Blood After Vegas

    After the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history killed 58 and injured around 530 people in Las Vegas Sunday night, blood banks in Nevada have been inundated with people wishing to donate blood to help the victims.


    Due to licensing this article must be read on our website

    But some people on social media, like former NSYNC singer Lance Bass, have reported that they are unable to… (more…)

  • Just 15% of the world has marriage equality for gay people

    There’s still away to go.

    The number of people who have marriage in their country has now topped 1.1 billion people, but that’s just 15 percent of the total population of the world. Indeed there are over 70 countries in which homosexuality is still illegal.

    A new analysis undertaken by Melbourne-based LGBT rights activist, Tony Pitman, has revealed that just over 1.1 billion people now live in countries with marriage equality. This figure represents 15 percent of the entire world population and is expected to rise over coming months as Taiwan and several other countries join the list.

    “I first started doing these calculations in mid-2013,” said Tony. “Back then, the number was 600 million. Today’s it’s 1.1 billion. That’s an increase of half a billion people in just four years. Never before has the world seen a positive social change of such speed and magnitude. It’s extraordinary! And it’s definitely something to keep in mind during the current debate here in Australia.”

    Australia is in the middle of a two-month postal survey on whether to introduce marriage equality or not, a process that’s been marred by a series of overwrought scare campaigns from the “No” side.

    Optimistic for change

    However, despite the ugliness of the debate, Tony is optimistic. “I think these numbers give heart to everyone who’s concerned about achieving equality in Australia,” he commented. “They show that the debate here is part of an unstoppable movement that’s sweeping the world. There’s no doubt that marriage equality is inevitable in Australia. It’s just a question of when, not if.”

    “It’s clear that a win for the “No” vote would only serve to delay equality by a couple of years at the most,” added Tony. “All those hundreds of millions of dollars will have been spent just to buy a little more time for an unjust law. It’s an obscene waste of time, money and resources.”

    “The truth is that when a same-sex couple gets married, their happiness is increased, and no one else is affected in any way. It’s a simple reform that brings only positive outcomes. That’s the reason why it’s spreading around the world so rapidly. It’s a win for everyone. And it will eventually be a win for Australia too.”

  • Six men are facing anal examinations in Egypt in crackdown on gay people

    Six men have been arrested in Egypt and are facing an invasive rectal and anal examination in a crackdown against gay people.

    Amnesty International has reported that six men in Egypt have been arrested and are facing “invasive forensic anal examinations” to prove their homosexuality.

    The arrests, on the evening of 27 September, came shortly after Egypt’s chief prosecutor announced an investigation in response to a public backlash against a recent concert in Cairo by the Lebanese band Mashrou’ Laila where members of the crowd raised a rainbow flag.

    Days after the rainbow flag was raised, Egyptian authorities began arresting men on charges of “debauchery”, the first of which, a 19-year-old man was sentenced to six years in prison, followed by six years of probation.

    The Rainbow flag is seen as an international symbol of LGBT+ rights and equality. Egypt has no LGBT+ protections and same-sex sex between men although not specifically outlawed can be punished under morality laws.

    Two other men who were arrested earlier this week and are currently detained in Agouza police station in Cairo are due to stand trial on 11 October. Another two men were arrested on 28 September and are detained in Dokki police station.

    Although not specifically outlawed, gay sex can be punished under morality laws with punishments including imprisonment of up to 17 years,  hard labour and fines. The country has abysmal legal protections for LGBT+ people.

    “Forced anal examinations are abhorrent and amount to torture”

    The Forensic Medical Authority is due to subject the six men to anal examinations to determine whether they have engaged in same-sex sexual relations. Amnesty International believes that such examinations violate the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment under international law.

    “The fact that Egypt’s Public Prosecutor is prioritizing hunting down people based on their perceived sexual orientation is utterly deplorable. These men should be released immediately and unconditionally – not put on trial,” said Najia Bounaim, North Africa Campaigns Director at Amnesty International.

    “Forced anal examinations are abhorrent and amount to torture. The Egyptian authorities have an appalling track record of using invasive physical tests which amount to torture against detainees in their custody. All plans to carry out such tests on these men must be stopped immediately.”

    Human rights violations

    According to AI, anal examinations violate the UN Convention against Torture, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the African Convention on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The UN Committee against Torture has emphasized that they “have no medical justification and cannot be consented to fully.”

     

  • British lesbian wins Hong Kong visa rights in legal bid

    British lesbian wins Hong Kong visa rights in legal bid

    A British lesbian on Monday won the right to live and work in Hong Kong with her partner in a landmark legal decision that could reduce more hurdles for same-sex couples in the city. QT, as she is referred to in court, entered into a civil partnership in Britain in 2011 and moved to Hong Kong… (more…)

  • US state sued over limits to adoptions by gay couples

    A civil rights group Wednesday sued Michigan over a law allowing agencies to deny adoptions to gay couples on religious grounds, challenging legislative efforts gaining momentum in some US states.

    The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) lawsuit seeks to limit which agencies can claim objections, by asking a Detroit federal court to rule that an agency… (more…)

  • Brazil just ruled that being gay is a disease

    A court in Brazil has ruled that gay cure therapy is legal

    Despite having one of the largest LGBT+ prides in the world, a court in Brazil’s capital, Brasilia, has ruled that homosexuality is a disease and that so-called “gay cure” therapy is legal.

    Judge Waldemar Claudio de Carvalho ruled that homosexuality can be treated as a disease and that conversion therapy as a means of curing it, is legal. The ruling has caused widespread condemnation and concern amongst LGBT+ people and their allies.

    The judge overruled a 1999 resolution which outlawed therapists from treating homosexuality.

    The appeal on that resolution was put forward by an evangelical Christian, Rozangela Justino, who was banned from practising after offering conversion therapies.

    A number of high-profile organisations and people have rallied against the ruling saying that they will appeal the decision. Toni Reis, who heads the National Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Alliance, said the ruling was a step in the wrong direction plans to appeal at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

    Brazil’s psychology council says it would appeal the injunction also.

    Speaking to the Guardian, David Miranda, a gay councillor in Rio de Janeiro said,

    “This decision is a big regression to the progressive conquests that the LBGT community had in recent decades”.

    Brazil also has one of the highest crime and murder rates against LGBT+ people in the world. In 2016 it was recorded that one LGBT+ person was killed every day in Brazil.

     

     

  • Trump’s administration demands the IP details to everyone who visited an anti-Trump website

    A petition to stop President Trump’s administration from gaining access to the personal data of those who visited an anti-Trump website has reached hundreds of thousands of people.

    Trump's administration demands the IP details to everyone who visited an anti-Trump website

    A warrant from the Department of Justice (DOJ) is seeking to reveal every person who visited an anti-Trump website. On the 17th July, the DOJ served a website hosting company, DreamHost with a search warrant for information which relates to a website which was used to coordinate protests during Donald Trump’s inauguration event back in January.

    The DOJ reports to the United States Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who was appointed by the President of the United States.

    The warrant includes a search on data about the website’s owners and over 1.3 million people who visited that site.

    Overreaching Government?

    The petition, which is hosted by the Avaaz petitioning site, is calling the request by the US Administration an investigatory overreach and threatens to violate the privacy and safety of millions of internet users.

    The petition reads,

    To Judge Morin and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia:

    We call on you to rule in favour of DreamHost in the matter of the search of www.disruptj20.org.

    The request for citizens’ data by the Trump administration is investigatory overreach and violates the privacy and compromises the safety of millions of people inside the US and around the world.

    The search warrant requested is an outrageous abuse of government authority by the Department of Justice and should be denied by the court.

    The website in question is www.disruptj20.org, which was used to organise demonstrations and protests on the 20th January during Trump’s inauguration.

    Dreamhost which hosts the site said it was going to challenge the request in court.

    They said,

    “DreamHost, like many online service providers, is approached by law enforcement regularly to provide information about customers who may be the subject of criminal investigations.

    “These types of requests are not uncommon; our legal department reviews and scrutinizes each request and, when necessary, rejects and challenges vague or faulty orders

    “You would be shocked to see just how many of these challenges we’re obligatedto mount every year!

    “Chris Ghazarian, our General Counsel, has taken issue with this particular search warrant for being a highly untargeted demand that chills free association and the right of free speech afforded by the Constitution”.

  • Gay marriage blocked once again in Northern Ireland

    It seems our lesbian & gay family in Northern Ireland will have to wait even longer to enjoy same-sex marriage after Northern Ireland’s High Court ruled to keep the ban in place.

    Gay marriage blocked once again in Northern Ireland

    Despite same-sex marriage being legal in England, Wales and Scotland, Northern Ireland is the only nation within the UK that doesn’t allow its gay and lesbian couples to get married. Instead, gay couples are only permitted to have Civil Partnerships, which are legally different to marriages.

    Two cases, specifically about Northern Ireland recognising same-sex marriage made outside the nation were rejected by the High Court. This means, even if a same-sex couple is married anywhere else in the UK, their marriage will not be valid in Northern Ireland.

    The two cases were heard together, due to the legal similarities. The first was known as Petition X, and was brought by a gay couple who were married in London in 2014. When they moved to Northern Ireland their marriage was changed to a Civil Partnership.

    The second case was brought by two couples in civil partnerships – Grainne Close and Shannon Sickles and Chris and Henry Flanagan-Kane. They contended the ban breaches their human rights.

    Both cases were rejected by Mr Justice O’Hara  who said the ban did not violate the rights of gay and lesbian couples. He added that it was for the nation’s politicians to decide social policy in Northern Ireland.

    Delivering the verdict the Judge said,

    “It is not at all difficult to understand how gay men and lesbians who have suffered discrimination, rejection and exclusion feel so strongly about the maintenance in Northern Ireland of the barrier to same sex marriage,

    “The judgement which I have to reach is not based on social policy but on the law.”

    The subject of same-sex marriage has been voted on five times by the Northern Ireland Assembly. Each time it was blocked by the DUP, the party Theresa May is relying on for her parliamentary majority after the General Election provided a slim majority for the Tories.

     

  • From April 2018 the government is going to restrict access to porn

    From April 2018 you will have to prove your age before accessing porn sites in the UK.

    From April 2018 the government is going to restrict access to porn

    The Conservative government are forging ahead with plans to require adults in the UK to prove they are over 18 before accessing porn sites. Digital minister Matt Hancock signed the commencement order today, which will enable the Digital Economy Act.

    Although no details about how the scheme could or would work, experts have suggested that proof of age could be provided by credit card details. The government could force Internet Service Providers such as BT and Virgin Media to block access to websites which do not comply with the new rules.

    The rules will apply to any website or platform which offers porn on a “commercial basis”.

    It is hoped that the measures will protect children from online porn.

    The Adam Smith Institute has reacted in dismay over the news.

    Sam Dumitriu, Research Economist at the Adam Smith Institute, said,

    “Requiring adult websites to force users to provide their credit card details poses a dangerous threat to privacy and will enable widespread credit card fraud.

    “Consenting adults shouldn’t be forced to announce that they’re looking at pornography to their credit card company.

    “There are massive fraud risks. It could mean that users are nudged into handing over data to unsafe sites – leaving them at the risk of fraud. Pornography is especially attractive to fraudsters as victims are often too embarrassed to flag up unexpected payments to adult sites to their credit card company.

    “Politicians should stop trying to regulate things they don’t understand.”

    In December 2014 pornography produced in the UK was subject to strict rules under the David Cameron’s Tory government. The types of scenes which studios could film were severely restricted with an amendment to the 2003 Communications Act.

    Some of the activities banned by the Conservative government could overtly affect the porn consumption of gay men in the UK – including those who watch BDSM, rimming (facesitting) and fisting.

     

  • Gay man wins pension rights for his husband in landmark legal case

    Landmark victory for LGBT rights: John Walker wins Supreme Court battle – ending pension inequality for same-sex couples.

    Liberty client John Walker has today won his five-year legal battle to secure equal pension benefits for his husband – in a landmark case that could change the lives of thousands of couples across the UK.

    The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that an exemption in the Equality Act – letting employers exclude same-sex partners from spousal benefits paid into pension funds before December 2005 – is discriminatory and breaches EU equality laws.

    The ruling from the UK’s highest court means the provision is immediately disapplied. From today, companies taking advantage of the exemption will be breaking the law.

    It marks the end of a lengthy fight for Mr Walker and Liberty, after an initial Employment Tribunal victory in 2012.

    John Walker said,

    “I am absolutely thrilled at today’s ruling, which is a victory for basic fairness and decency. Finally, this absurd injustice has been consigned to the history books – and my husband and I can now get on with enjoying the rest of our lives together.

    “But it is to our Government’s great shame that it has taken so many years, huge amounts of taxpayers’ money and the UK’s highest court to drag them into the 21st century. In the years since we started this legal challenge, how many people have spent their final days uncertain about whether their loved one would be looked after? How many people have been left unprovided for, having already suffered the loss of their partner?

    “What I would like from Theresa May and her ministers today is a formal commitment that this change will stay on the statute books after Brexit.”

    Emma Norton, Liberty lawyer acting for Mr Walker, said,

    “We are delighted the Supreme Court recognised this pernicious little provision for what it was – discrimination against gay people, pure and simple.

    “But this ruling was made under EU law and is a direct consequence of the rights protection the EU gives us. We now risk losing that protection. The Government must promise that there will be no rollback on LGBT rights after Brexit – and commit to fully protecting them in UK law.

    “How else can John be sure he and others like him have achieved lasting justice today?”

    Background

    John Walker retired from chemicals group Innospec in 2003, having worked for the company for more than 20 years. During his time there, he was required to pay into its pension scheme. He made the same contributions as his heterosexual colleagues.

    Mr Walker and his husband have been together since 1993. They entered into a civil partnership in January 2006, having registered on the first day it was legally possible to do so. This was later converted into a marriage.

    Relying on the Equality Act exemption, Innospec made clear that – should Mr Walker die – his husband would not receive the same survivor benefits he would if he were a woman.

    Those benefits would not include all the contributions Mr Walker had made prior to 2005 – leaving his husband with a pension of only a few hundred pounds a year. If he were married to a woman, she would receive £45,000 a year for the rest of her life.

    Innospec’s position was supported by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), which joined the case and led much of the argument against Mr Walker.

    The DWP argued that gay couples in the position of Mr Walker and his husband should not benefit from the same pension arrangements as heterosexual couples.

    Today’s judgment

    Today’s unanimous judgment was given by Lord Kerr. All five justices agreed the loophole was discriminatory and breached EU law. The judgment finds that:

    • The legal status of gay and lesbian employees has been transformed by the introduction of equality legislation from the EU (paragraph 17).
    • Non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation is now a principle of EU law. Any denial of a spouse’s pension calculated on the basis of all Mr Walker’s years of service would be unlawful (paragraph 74).
    • The Equality Act loophole that enables such discrimination is unlawful and must be disapplied. Mr Walker’s husband is entitled to a spouse’s pension calculated on all the years of Mr Walker’s time with Innospec (paragraph 76).
    • Since the European Communities Act 1972, UK courts have had the power to disapply national law where it conflicts with EU law This will change when the UK leaves the EU.