1 / 24

INDEPENDENT BODIES & DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LGBT PEOPLE

INDEPENDENT BODIES & DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LGBT PEOPLE. PROFESSOR ZORICA MRSEVIC. IN SPITE OF THEIR WISH TO IMPROVE HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE LGBT PERSONS. INDEPENDENT BODIES FACE WITH EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL OBSTACLES. EXTERNAL OBSTACLES. WEAK GENERAL POSITION OF THESE BODIES

kirby
Download Presentation

INDEPENDENT BODIES & DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LGBT PEOPLE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. INDEPENDENT BODIES & DISCRIMINATIONAGAINST LGBT PEOPLE PROFESSOR ZORICA MRSEVIC

  2. IN SPITE OF THEIR WISH TO IMPROVE HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE LGBT PERSONS INDEPENDENT BODIES FACE WITH EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL OBSTACLES

  3. EXTERNAL OBSTACLES WEAK GENERAL POSITION OF THESE BODIES DIMINISHING ATTITUDES OF THE TOP RANKED POLITICIANS NEGATIVE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT REGARDING LGBT RIGHTS RELATIONSHIP WITH LGBT AND WOMEN’S MOVEMENTS: lack of interest MEDIA CONTROLED BY THE POWERFULL POLITICAL ACTORS AND CENTRES EU INTEGRATION

  4. 1. GENERAL POSITION OF THESE BODIES For “WIDOWS” LACK OF REAL POLITICAL SUPPORT UNCLEAR MANDATES who does what: Ministry- Commissioner – Ombudsman LACK OF ADEQUATE LOGISTICS OPENLY EXPRESSED EXPECTATION TO STAY AWAY

  5. 2. DIMINISHING ATTITUDES TOP RANKED STATE OFFICIALS PUBLICLY EXPRESS THEIR NEGATIVE, DIMINISHING ATTITUDES ON INDEPENDENT BODIES: Example: instead to respect recommendation to stop discrimination, a party leader said: “SHE SHOULD MIND HER BUSINESS INSTEAD TO MIX INTO MINE”

  6. 3. RELATIONSHIP WITH LGBT AND WOMEN’S MOVEMENTS: READINESS FOR COOPERATION WHEN INVITED BUT WITHOUT OWN INITIATIVES LACK OF SUPPORT LACK OF UNDERSTANDING LACK OF INTERES

  7. 4. GENERAL SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT REGARDING LGBT RIGHTS VERY NEGATIVE, LACK OF POPULARITY OPEN HOSTILITY CONFRONTATION THREATENS WITH VIOLENCE PERCEPTION AS BEING AGAINST NATIONAL INTRESTS

  8. 5. MEDIA ATTACKS TO INDEPENDENT INSTITUTIONS ORCHESTRATED WITH POLITICAL CONFRONATIONS DISAPEARANCE OF THE WHOLE INSTITUTION FROM MEDIA DURING CONFRONTATION WITH AUTHORITIES

  9. WHAT IS TO BE PUBLISHED AND WHEN IS VERY CAREFULLY MEASURED A powerful director of one main TV house after an ombudsman criticized authorities in an interview: “FUNNY, IT SEEMS THAT THE TYPE WRONGLY BELIEVED HE MIGHT BE SOMETHING AS INDEPENDENT OMBUDSMAN AND THE STUPID WOMAN JOURNALIST BELIEVED IN FREEDOM OF MEDIA”

  10. 6. EU INTEGRATION – confronted opinions LGBT RIGHTS IS NOT THE EU ISSUE AT ALL LGBT RIGHTS IS SOMETHING WHAT IN FACT THE EU IMPOSES RESISTANCE: IF “THIS” IS CONDITION FOR THE EU, WE DON’T WANT TO ENTER THE EU LACK OF VISIBLE DOUBTLESS SUPPORT BY THE EU STRUCTURES AND THE EU MEMBER STATES

  11. INTERNAL RESISTANCE COLLEAGUES AND STAFF RELUCTANT REGARDING THE LGBT RIGHTS

  12. LACK OF UNDERSTANDING DIFFICULTIES TO ORGANISE EDUCATIONS AND TRAININGS ON “THESE” TOPICS RIVARLY DENIAL OF IMPORTANCE LACK OF COLLEGIAL SUPPORT NARROW INTERPRETATION OF MANDATE AS STRICT WAITING THE CITIZEN’S PETTITIONS TO ACT

  13. COUNCIL OF EUROPE NOT ADEQUATELLY USED ITS POSSIBILITIES TO HAVE IMPACT JUDGMENTS OF THE ECHR RELEVANT FOR THE LGBT RIGHTS ARE NOT TRANSLATED AND MOSTLY NOT KNOWN HEADS OF INDEPEDENT INSTITUTIONS ARE TRUSTED BY THE COE WHEN PRESENTING THEMSELVES AS BEING COMMITTED TO THE LGBT RIGHTS BY WORDS ONLY

  14. LEGAL OPTIMISM: THE MOST IMPORTANT IS TO ADOPT NEW LAWS

  15. INSTITUTIONALOPTIMISM: NOW WHEN WE HAVE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTIONS, LGBT RIGHTS ARE WELL PROTECTED

  16. FINALLY:THE PERSONS WHO HEAD THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTION SOME OF THEM:

  17. DOES NOT WANT THE WHOLE INSTITUTION TO BE IDENTIFIED WITH “THIS” ISSUE

  18. FEAR OF NOT BE EFFECTIVE IN OTHER PEOPLE CASES IF PERCEIVED AS KEEPING THE LGBT SIDE

  19. BUT ALSO: PAYS MOST ATTENTION TO OWN POPULARITY AND OWN RE-ELECTION AVOIDS “UNPOPULAR” ISSUES

  20. PRIORITIES HOW TO BE IN GOOD RELATION WITH POWERFULL CIRCLES AND PERSONALITIES & HOW TO IMPROVE OWN PUBLIC IMAGE INSTEAD OF READINESS TO DEAL WITH “THESE” ISSUE

  21. TOO BIG & UNREALISTIC EXPECTATION MIGHT LEAD TO DISAPPOINTMENT IMPOSSIBLITY TO BE EFFECTIVE LEADS TO RESIGNTATION

  22. WHAT CAN BE DONE WHO CONTROLS THE CONTROLLERS: IF NOBODY, AS IT IS THE SITUATION NOW, THE LGBT PERSONS AS WELL AS ALL OTHER “UNPOPULAR” MINORITIES WILL NOT GET PROPER PROTECTION OF THEIR RIGHTS BY THE INDEPENDENT BODIES

  23. MONITORING PROJECTS LEAD BY THE LGBT NGOs AND EXPERTS ON ACTIVITIES OF THE INDEPENDET INSTITUTIONS IN PROTECTION & IMPREVEMENT THE LGBT RIGHTS

  24. OPINION OF THE LGBT PEOPLE: WHAT THE INDEPENDENET INSTITUTIONS DO FOR YOU AND YOUR RIGHTS DO YOU HAVE TRUST IN THEM DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS THEIR MANDATE AND HOW TO ADDRRESS TO THEM IN WHAT SITUATION CAN YOU EXPECT THE INDEPENDENT BODIES TO INTERVENE FOR THE LGNT RIGHTS ….

More Related