Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons in Estonia may face legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents. Both male and female same-sex sexual activity are legal in Estonia, but households headed by same-sex couples are not eligible for the same legal protections available to opposite-sex couples.
Same-sex sexual activity, which was illegal in the Soviet Union, was legalised in Estonia in 1992. The age of consent is 14 years and was equalized for both homosexual and heterosexual sex in 2001. Homosexuals are not banned from military service.
The Republic of Estonia, a parliamentary republic and member of the European Union, acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on 21 October 1991 without reservations. Although the government has made important steps in implementing the Covenant, it has yet to fully succeed in protecting from discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. The third periodic report submitted by Estonia on 10 December 2008 highlights legislation prohibiting discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, but the report does not discuss the broader problems of implementation and enforcement of the legislation. Furthermore it is evident from the report that training for police and state officials on issues related to sexual violence do not include violence against LGBT individuals. This report is a collaborative effort by Global Rights, the Estonian Human Rights Centre, ILGA Europe and Reimo Mets (Seksuaalvähemuste Kaitse Ühing). Since 1992, laws outlawing sexual acts between consenting adults have not existed. Although this is an important step to end discrimination and stigmatization on grounds of sexual orientation and non-normative gender identities, it does not imply full respect of civil and politics rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals. Only in 2002 was the age of consent for same-sex sexual relations equalized with that of opposite-sex sexual relations. While legislation prohibiting discrimination in employment exists, the attitudes of society are more conservative than the legislation. Discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is widespread. Based on the findings of Young v. Australia and X. v. Colombia, same-sex couples should be extended benefits and rights that the state recognizes by law for unmarried opposite sex couples.
The government has not institutionalized necessary regulations guaranteeing benefits for unmarried same-sex couples and their children as those offered to unmarried opposite-sex couples and their children. While success was seen in the Viimsi case, the civil law system of Estonia does not allow this to be considered equalizing precedent for all same-sex couples, requiring action by the government. Social stigmatization, as evidenced by the statements of Peter Mardna, the discrimination of the Dutch ambassador and his partner, the protests against LGBT rights, and recent polls regarding the attitudes towards LGBT people, foster discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity. The broader problem
of stigmatization undermines the government’s efforts to battle discrimination. As seen from its insufficient funding of the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner, its efforts are too little. The evidence regarding social stigmatization shows that there are problems, yet the government does not provide an efficient process of reporting for discriminatory acts against sexual minorities.
No comments:
Post a Comment