UNDERSTANDING THE obstacles
2024: The Shocking Challenges LGBTQIA Refugees Must Overcome!
- Atilla Tiriyaki
- Average Reading Time: 11 minutes
- Community, Refugees
- articles, atillat
People have been displaced and migrated to more abundant lands since time began. From the formation of countries, the existence of regulated borders and the ease and availability of travel, refugees have existed throughout the centuries, whether it was the Huguenots escaping religious persecution in 1687 to the French nobility fleeing the revolution in France, the need for people seeking help and refuge had been around for a long time. With a rise in right-wing political agendas and a hardening of anti-LGTBQIA+ laws in specific counties and regions, what does it mean to be an LGBTQIA+ refugee in 2024?
DISCLAIMER
All published articles are intended for an audience aged 18 years and over and have been written by members of the general public. Many will likely not be journalists nor be affiliated with any professional bodies associated with members of the media. The articles will likely be based on the authors' own opinions, views, and experiences...more
The word refugee originates from the French word réfugié, meaning to flee. Even though similar problems that have caused people to flee over the centuries exist today, how we treat and ultimately offer aid to them is classified by the category their circumstances fall within. Though laws existed in certain countries around the treatment of those seeking refuge, such as the Aliens Act in 1905 within the United Kingdom, it was not until after the end of the Second World War that countries got together to formalise an approach.
Six years after the creation of the United Nations and when the charter was formally approved, the 1951 Refugee Convention was organised, in which 149 member states discussed the meaning of the term refugee and drafted the status and definitions, classifications and treatment of future refugees seeking asylum at their borders. The groundwork for the convention was based on the previous convention relating to the International Status of Refugees, which occurred in 1933, 22 years before the refugee convention.
The convention was approved in 1951 and came into force on April 22, 1954, with 146 countries signing up. A protocol relating to the convention was put in place in 1967, which removed the time limits that were applied and the removal of geographic limitations, which was approved, and 147 signed the protocol.
Six years after the creation of the United Nations and when the charter was formally approved, the 1951 Refugee Convention was organised, in which 149 member states discussed the meaning of the term refugee and drafted the status and definitions, classifications and treatment of future refugees seeking asylum at their borders. The groundwork for the convention was based on the previous convention relating to the International Status of Refugees, which occurred in 1933, 22 years before the refugee convention.
The convention was approved in 1951 and came into force on April 22, 1954, with 146 countries signing up. A protocol relating to the convention was put in place in 1967, which removed the time limits that were applied and the removal of geographic limitations, which was approved, and 147 signed the protocol.
The convention and protocol are essential for defining what makes a person a refugee and any likely treatment they might receive at the border of a country that signed up to the convention, protocol, or both. Of the 193 members of the UN, 146 (or 76%) of countries agree to follow the definitions and to be subject to international law. The convention and protocol define and outline what it means to be a refugee; however, it is important to note that they do not include any protection or classifications relating to economic migrants.
Article 1 of the convention defines a refugee as “As a result of events occurring and owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.”
The first and most crucial point is returning home; back to their country would mean persecution, imprisonment or death. The convention then classifies refugees within one or more of five specific grounds. The person claiming asylum would then be required to qualify within the categories of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group.
All member states that signed up to the convention and protocol agree to observe and implement the rights and responsibility, which include respecting a refugee’s status and rights, including marriage, providing free access to courts, providing administrative assistance, identity papers, travel documents and the ability to transfer their assets.
Participating member countries are not permitted to discriminate against refugees, expect refugees to pay taxes and fiscal charges, impose penalties on those who entered the country illegally, and, as a customary part of international law, expel or forcibly return refugees, known as refoul, where doing so would mean certain death.
Article 1 of the convention defines a refugee as “As a result of events occurring and owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.”
The first and most crucial point is returning home; back to their country would mean persecution, imprisonment or death. The convention then classifies refugees within one or more of five specific grounds. The person claiming asylum would then be required to qualify within the categories of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group.
All member states that signed up to the convention and protocol agree to observe and implement the rights and responsibility, which include respecting a refugee’s status and rights, including marriage, providing free access to courts, providing administrative assistance, identity papers, travel documents and the ability to transfer their assets.
Participating member countries are not permitted to discriminate against refugees, expect refugees to pay taxes and fiscal charges, impose penalties on those who entered the country illegally, and, as a customary part of international law, expel or forcibly return refugees, known as refoul, where doing so would mean certain death.
With sixty-six countries around the world still criminalising same-sex relationships and ten countries imposing the maximum penalty of death, there is a real and present danger for LGBTQIA+ individuals living in those countries and a risk to their lives. Should their sexuality or gender identity become known to the authorities or the wider community, causing them to flee for their lives, they would, under the definition of the convention, likely be classified as a refugee and might be able to seek asylum.
The convention and protocol are important landmarks in humanity’s development, as they provide a level of expectation and protection for those in desperate and dangerous situations. Though a set of principles, they were drafted in the 1950s when 66 (or 28%) out of 233 countries had decriminalised or ever had laws in place criminalising same-sex relationships. Even though the world has changed over the past 73 years, the definitions and classifications have not been revisited to reflect the modern world and its challenges.
The main challenge for LGBTQIA+ individuals claiming asylum based on their sexuality or gender identity is around the grounds under which they would qualify. If a person were from a war-torn country or they were a member of a race or religion where they faced persecution, they would likely apply specifically on those grounds; however, if your sole reason for claiming asylum is based on your sexuality or gender identity, then you would only be able to apply under the “member of a particular social group.”
Article 10 defines a member of a particular social group as being someone who belongs to a social group where members of that group share an innate characteristic or a common background that cannot be changed or share a characteristic or belief that is so fundamental to identity or conscience that a person should not be forced to renounce it, and finally that the group has a distinct identity in the relevant country because it is perceived as being different by the surrounding society.
The challenge lies in the definition being vague and non-specific concerning the LGBTQIA+ community. Based on the definition, the distinct identity in a given country and belonging to a group may also be an issue. In many countries, there are no official censuses or ways to quantify the size of the local LGBTQIA+ community; in addition, due to cultural and societal beliefs, some may still hide or suppress their identity to blend and fit into society. For an LGBTQIA+ refugee, the priority is to go to a country in which they will be safe, even if the government may still be reforming its laws concerning LGBTQIA+ equality. That means the interpretation and subsequent treatment are open to interpretation, and they could be refused based on a belief by that country that those grounds are insufficient to claim asylum.
The convention and protocol are important landmarks in humanity’s development, as they provide a level of expectation and protection for those in desperate and dangerous situations. Though a set of principles, they were drafted in the 1950s when 66 (or 28%) out of 233 countries had decriminalised or ever had laws in place criminalising same-sex relationships. Even though the world has changed over the past 73 years, the definitions and classifications have not been revisited to reflect the modern world and its challenges.
The main challenge for LGBTQIA+ individuals claiming asylum based on their sexuality or gender identity is around the grounds under which they would qualify. If a person were from a war-torn country or they were a member of a race or religion where they faced persecution, they would likely apply specifically on those grounds; however, if your sole reason for claiming asylum is based on your sexuality or gender identity, then you would only be able to apply under the “member of a particular social group.”
Article 10 defines a member of a particular social group as being someone who belongs to a social group where members of that group share an innate characteristic or a common background that cannot be changed or share a characteristic or belief that is so fundamental to identity or conscience that a person should not be forced to renounce it, and finally that the group has a distinct identity in the relevant country because it is perceived as being different by the surrounding society.
The challenge lies in the definition being vague and non-specific concerning the LGBTQIA+ community. Based on the definition, the distinct identity in a given country and belonging to a group may also be an issue. In many countries, there are no official censuses or ways to quantify the size of the local LGBTQIA+ community; in addition, due to cultural and societal beliefs, some may still hide or suppress their identity to blend and fit into society. For an LGBTQIA+ refugee, the priority is to go to a country in which they will be safe, even if the government may still be reforming its laws concerning LGBTQIA+ equality. That means the interpretation and subsequent treatment are open to interpretation, and they could be refused based on a belief by that country that those grounds are insufficient to claim asylum.
The next major issue is how do you prove that you identify as LGBTQIA+. The problems facing LGBTQIA+ refugees can sometimes be similar to those claiming asylum on the grounds of religious persecution. With the grounds of religion, many asylum applicants will typically undergo religious knowledge testing, being asked a variety of questions like how many chapters are there in the book of John? Their responses are used as evidence of whether asylum is granted. Official documents, such as a faith-related marriage certificate, baptism certificate, confirmation of affiliation, and registration of place of meeting for worship certificates, can also be used to support and provide proof to support an asylum claim; however, how does a person prove their sexuality or gender identity?
Some countries have made asylum seekers undergo questionnaires of a personal and intimate nature, some have carried out lie detection tests on applicants, whilst in extreme cases, applicants have been forced to undergo intimate medical examines where the examiner is looking for evidence of a person’s gender identity or sexual orientation. All of these are often ineffective and leave the outcome at the feeling or discretion of the case worker or assessor.
Within Gayther’s LGBTQIA+-Refugees-Guide, in the section entitled “How can I prove my sexuality or gender identity?” there are several suggestions around collating proof. Such as official documentation like arrest reports, court summons, newspaper articles, patterns and past relationships, giving evidence relating to relationships a person might have or have had such as emails, pictures, etc. Another option might be testimonies from people who knew about their sexuality or gender identity at home or in the country they are claiming asylum. Proving a stance, approach or treatment that their home country adopts towards the LGBTQIA+ community in that community, such as news and social media recordings, might be acceptable to show the severity of the situation.
Ultimately, without a standardised approach and guidelines, the assessment and treatment of LGBTQIA+ asylum will be different and vary from country to country, making it difficult for asylum seekers to know where to go to seek safety.
Some countries have made asylum seekers undergo questionnaires of a personal and intimate nature, some have carried out lie detection tests on applicants, whilst in extreme cases, applicants have been forced to undergo intimate medical examines where the examiner is looking for evidence of a person’s gender identity or sexual orientation. All of these are often ineffective and leave the outcome at the feeling or discretion of the case worker or assessor.
Within Gayther’s LGBTQIA+-Refugees-Guide, in the section entitled “How can I prove my sexuality or gender identity?” there are several suggestions around collating proof. Such as official documentation like arrest reports, court summons, newspaper articles, patterns and past relationships, giving evidence relating to relationships a person might have or have had such as emails, pictures, etc. Another option might be testimonies from people who knew about their sexuality or gender identity at home or in the country they are claiming asylum. Proving a stance, approach or treatment that their home country adopts towards the LGBTQIA+ community in that community, such as news and social media recordings, might be acceptable to show the severity of the situation.
Ultimately, without a standardised approach and guidelines, the assessment and treatment of LGBTQIA+ asylum will be different and vary from country to country, making it difficult for asylum seekers to know where to go to seek safety.
The many issues and challenges LGBTQIA+ refugees face are not easy, and the same can be said for countries that want to grant asylum to genuine LGBTQIA+ individuals fleeing persecution. With such a broad definition and lack of consistent evidence, it can be easy for someone who is an economic migrant seeking a better life in a new country to claim asylum on the grounds of being persecuted due to their sexuality or gender identity, given how difficult it can be to prove. The LGBTQIA+ community is made up of diverse people and a variety of personalities and characteristics. Could cases be refused based on a person being too gay or not gay enough?
The Refugee Convention and Protocol are a set of legal principles; any country granting asylum and providing ongoing support for their protection and care is an act of compassion and not something anyone should take for granted. Though imperfect, the system must still exist, and all participating states must continue supporting the principles. With that in mind, what are some ways the convention could be improved to make it better for LGBTQIA+ refugees and the country’s assessment of their application?
Ideally, the grounds would be assessed, and the definitions expanded to reflect more modern-day challenges. If an LGBTQIA+ community-specific ground were to be created, even as a separate protocol that member states would sign up for, it would mean that LGBTQIA+ refugees could quickly identify countries where they could safely claim asylum. The definition could be specific to the community and the circumstances in which a person can claim asylum based on their sexuality or gender identity.
The assessment, though harder, could be standardised and used by all those countries that signed up to the protocol. Community-specific training given to those assessing asylum applications, especially concerning the use of language and overall approach, would be an essential first step. Supporting and helping LGBTQIA+ individuals to connect and get involved with the local LGBTQIA+ community during their assessment, all of which could be used as a means of testimonials. International bodies or associations could be formed representing LGBTQIA+ individuals from hostile nations, and membership could be used as proof of belonging to a social group. Voluntary medical exams could be an option, as could using affidavits or sworn written statements. If an individual lied, it could undermine their status and subsequent citizenship.
There are no simple solutions or quick fixes concerning LGBTQIA+ refugees. The actual number of refugees is thought to be relatively low; however, it is rising, and the UN, refugee organisations and charities are trying to find possible solutions to support LGBTQIA+ refugees. However, a sad reality is that many LGBTIQ+ individuals are often subject to the same abuse from which they fled and lack the support and protection they desperately need. In 2021, the UN hosted a Global Roundtable on Protection and Solutions for LGBTIQ+ People in Forced Displacement and invited 664 participants, from academic researchers and government officials to refugee-led organisations.
The findings and proposed solutions to further explore are interesting and raise significant barriers for LGBTQIA+ individuals in areas such as
With the rise in more centre-right- and right-wing political parties, as well as countries hardening their position concerning the LGBTQIA+ community, over the coming years, we might see more people claiming asylum purely based on their sexuality or gender identity. Though the system might be open to abuse by those looking to gain asylum on false grounds, it does not mean that it should ignore that there are genuine people needing support and reform the way many of the community are treated and handled.
Ultimately, though likely a select number of countries, transparency around those countries willing to assess and accept LGBTQIA+ refugees on the grounds of persecution purely based on their sexuality or gender identity is one of the critical first steps in helping those in vulnerable and life-threatening situations.
The Refugee Convention and Protocol are a set of legal principles; any country granting asylum and providing ongoing support for their protection and care is an act of compassion and not something anyone should take for granted. Though imperfect, the system must still exist, and all participating states must continue supporting the principles. With that in mind, what are some ways the convention could be improved to make it better for LGBTQIA+ refugees and the country’s assessment of their application?
Ideally, the grounds would be assessed, and the definitions expanded to reflect more modern-day challenges. If an LGBTQIA+ community-specific ground were to be created, even as a separate protocol that member states would sign up for, it would mean that LGBTQIA+ refugees could quickly identify countries where they could safely claim asylum. The definition could be specific to the community and the circumstances in which a person can claim asylum based on their sexuality or gender identity.
The assessment, though harder, could be standardised and used by all those countries that signed up to the protocol. Community-specific training given to those assessing asylum applications, especially concerning the use of language and overall approach, would be an essential first step. Supporting and helping LGBTQIA+ individuals to connect and get involved with the local LGBTQIA+ community during their assessment, all of which could be used as a means of testimonials. International bodies or associations could be formed representing LGBTQIA+ individuals from hostile nations, and membership could be used as proof of belonging to a social group. Voluntary medical exams could be an option, as could using affidavits or sworn written statements. If an individual lied, it could undermine their status and subsequent citizenship.
There are no simple solutions or quick fixes concerning LGBTQIA+ refugees. The actual number of refugees is thought to be relatively low; however, it is rising, and the UN, refugee organisations and charities are trying to find possible solutions to support LGBTQIA+ refugees. However, a sad reality is that many LGBTIQ+ individuals are often subject to the same abuse from which they fled and lack the support and protection they desperately need. In 2021, the UN hosted a Global Roundtable on Protection and Solutions for LGBTIQ+ People in Forced Displacement and invited 664 participants, from academic researchers and government officials to refugee-led organisations.
The findings and proposed solutions to further explore are interesting and raise significant barriers for LGBTQIA+ individuals in areas such as
- Adequate and appropriate training for asylum case handlers, designed to reduce prejudice and discrimination, as well as developing appropriate language during assessments and communications
- The creation of safe space protocols, especially in refugee assessment centres for LGBTQIA+ refugees, may not be able to identify or gain support when amongst the general population of refugees, with the majority fleeing war or religious persecution. Creating resources and safe space groups for LGBTQIA+ to connect
- Advocate for legal reform and funding the support and handling of LGBTQIA+ persons.
- Create environments in which LGBTQIA+ individual can safely share their experiences without fear of judgment, failure or retribution.
With the rise in more centre-right- and right-wing political parties, as well as countries hardening their position concerning the LGBTQIA+ community, over the coming years, we might see more people claiming asylum purely based on their sexuality or gender identity. Though the system might be open to abuse by those looking to gain asylum on false grounds, it does not mean that it should ignore that there are genuine people needing support and reform the way many of the community are treated and handled.
Ultimately, though likely a select number of countries, transparency around those countries willing to assess and accept LGBTQIA+ refugees on the grounds of persecution purely based on their sexuality or gender identity is one of the critical first steps in helping those in vulnerable and life-threatening situations.
Discover all available resources on Gayther relating to refugees and migrants. Resources for people forced to leave their homes due to war, violence or persecution.
Discover refugee and migrant-related information for over two hundred thirty countries worldwide. Guides that help people find the support they need during difficult times.
A valuable tool for any refugee or those in a position of authority to assist in communicating with each other. The online tool enables users to select, point and enter the necessary information in their language and English, choosing those literal translations from over 100 languages.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: All published articles have been written by members of the general public. Many will likely not be journalists nor be affiliated with any professional bodies associated with members of the media. The articles will likely be based on the authors’ own opinions, views, and experiences. Gayther does not endorse or accept any responsibility or liability regarding any materials within the news and media pages. This page may contain external links to third party websites; Gayther provides these links for your convenience and does not endorse, warrant or recommend any particular products or services. By clicking on any external links, you will leave Gayther and be taken to the third-party website, which you do so at your own risk and by accessing the site, you will be required to comply with the external third party’s terms and conditions of use and privacy policies
Discover all of the topical articles written by people from across the community and friends, all sharing their stories, opinions and experiences
