Repeal Colonial Era Laws that Entrench Discrimination and Perpetuate Violence
As the Yahapalanaya Government that committed to protect and
promote the human rights, it is imperative that it takes all measures
to prevent discrimination, harassment, violence and other violations
against all of its citizens, including those who identify as as Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex and Queer (LGBTIQ). Recent media
reports indicate that key measures to reform and remove laws impacting
LGBTIQ persons, particularly Section 365 and 365A of the Penal Code
which criminalises same sex activity and continues to be used to harass
and persecute LBTIQ persons, were taken out of the National Human Rights
Action Plan (NHRAP) 2017‐2021. We the undersigned strongly condemn and
wish to express our outrage and concern that this Government is seeking
to perpetuate violence and discrimination against individuals who
identify as LGBTIQ, instead of taking legislative and policy actions to
address systemic violence and discrimination dating from the colonial
era.
The Yahapalanaya Government announced that it would
commit to universal human rights standards and comply with its
international human rights obligations in addition to enforcing and
reforming national frameworks, including as per the current Constitution
of Sri Lanka which guarantees the fundamental rights of all its
citizens. The NHRAP is one mechanism through which the Government
identifies legislative reforms and policy actions necessary to fulfill
its constitutional obligations to “respect, secure and advance” human
rights enshrined under Article 4(d) of the Constitution.
While
there was some civil society participation in the drafting of the NHRAP,
the process was undertaken in a rushed manner, leaving little space for
public participation. Unofficial accounts attest that the final draft
presented to the cabinet was over 300 plus pages and included
substantive measures to address critical failings and gaps with regards
to human rights, including provisions for the repeal of Section 365 and
365A of the Penal Code. Several media reports quoted Cabinet
Spokesperson and Minister of Health, Dr. Rajitha Senaratne indicating
that the Cabinet of Ministers had amended the NHRAP draft rejecting
proposed measures to protect people from discrimination based on their
sexual orientation and gender identity, and to repeal Sections 365 and
365A. Some media claimed that it was done citing the need to protect
national culture. It was also reported that other provisions in the
draft NHRAP pertaining to vagrancy, marital rape among others had been
dropped.
We express deep concern that the Government has chosen
to continue archaic and discriminatory legal provisions and practices
that perpetuate harassment, abuse, injustice and discrimination against
its own citizens instead of over‐turning colonial era laws based on
Victorian values that are alien to this country. These laws pertaining
to criminialisation of same sex activity were imposed on Sri Lanka
during British rule and similar provisions in British law have since
been repealed in other countries. Furthermore there is no evidence to
indicate that homosexual conduct was criminalised prior to colonial rule
in Sri Lanka. It is therefore shameful and untenable that the current
government continues to mislead the public by citing colonial values as
representative of Sri Lankan culture in order to validate violence,
abuse, ill‐treatment and discrimination.
In the context in Sri
Lanka the ‘silencing’ of LGBTIQ communities extends to the law wherein
which a vulnerable community is deemed not‐existent and the protections
and rights afforded to other segments of society have been continually
denied. While the LGBTIQ community is defined by their citizenship and
not by this one legal provision it does impact the day‐to‐day lives of
LGBTIQ people all over the country across class, race and economics.
Even while the State has argued that it has not prosecuted anyone under
the provision of 365 and 365A, these laws in effect criminalise sexual
acts between consenting adults and has specific and multiple impacts on
the LGBTIQ community.
The LGBTIQ community have, for many years
faced and reported incidents of rape, physical, verbal and emotional
abuse and discrimination at the hands of private actors and state
officials. The law has provided a framework for stigmatisation and
discrimination against LGBTIQ individuals and perpetuates a culture of
impunity wherein citizens of this country are unable to access the full
protection of the law or speak out against the violence. This has led to
depression, anxiety, stress, isolation, denial and even suicide,
preventing people from enjoying to the full their rights to bodily
integrity, sexual autonomy, equality and non discrimination as citizens
of Sri Lanka. There have been negligible remedies for these injustices
from law enforcement or other sources of redress due to the
criminalisation of relationships between consenting adults. These
discriminatory laws also serve to prevent reporting of these crimes, and
thereby further perpetuate the practice of abuse.
Furthermore,
Sections 365 and 365A violate a number of constitutionally guaranteed
human rights: by legally entrenching arbitrary notions of “natural" and
“unnatural" sexual intercourse, and criminalising private sexual acts as
"grossly indecent", the provisions violate the Freedom of Thought and
Conscience guaranteed under Article 10 of the Constitution, and Freedom
of Expression, guaranteed Article 14(1)(a). By prohibiting sexual acts
committed by consenting adults acting in private, the State interferes
with private relationships that no one has the right to interfere with,
violating their Freedom of Association under Article 14(1)(c). By making
large groups of people vulnerable to police abuse, employment
discrimination, refusal of healthcare, etc., the provisions violate
guarantees of equal protection and non‐discrimination under Article 12
of the Constitution.
In the context of post‐war recovery and
conflict transformation the Government established two consultation
processes ‐ the Public Representations Committee on Constitutional
Reform and the Consultation Task Force on Reconciliation Mechanisms to
ascertain the public’s views on required legal and policy changes. Both
reports specifically reference submissions received on sexual
orientation and gender identities, which speak to issues of
discrimination and harassment and propose constitutional, legal and
institutional safeguards and measures. Both these processes were
nationally owned, and sought the opinions of Sri Lankans
with regard to the changes they would like to see to overcome challenges they face on a day‐to‐day basis.
As
such, we as individuals self‐identifying as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,
Transgender, Intersex, and Queer (LGBTIQ), as family members and friends
of LGBTIQ people, and as individuals/communities coming forward in
support of a community of Sri Lankans, call upon the Government of Sri
Lanka, His Excellency President Maithripala Sirisena, His Excellency the
Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe to meet national and international
obligations towards the citizens of the Democratic Socialist Republic of
Sri Lanka by:
Ensuring that efforts are made to
address discrimination and violence against LGBTIQ persons through the
National Human Rights Action Plan 2017 – 2021, and related review processes.
Repealing Section 365A of the Penal Code
Repealing the Vagrant’s Ordinance
Eliminating discrimination against people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identities though constitutional reform
Considered the most important Asian architect of the 20th century,
Geoffrey Bawa is credited with creating the new Tropical Modern
aesthetic that is now common throughout the world. This style of
architecture seamlessly combines the indoor with the outdoor, being
minimalist in composition and creating semi-enclosed spaces. His
buildings are constructed of indigenous local materials and crafts,
borrowing from the native forms with an emphasis on efficiency. Bawa’s
buildings are contemporary in design but rooted in local tradition. Bawa
is considered the most influential architect from the Asian region.
Sri Lankan Parliament designed by Geoffrey Bawa
Geoffrey Bawa
Born in 1919, Geoffrey Bawa studied at Cambridge University
before moving on to study law in London. After serving in the war, Bawa
returned to his native Sri Lanka, purchased an abandoned rubber estate,
and converted it into one of the country's most iconic gardens and
estates. He then returned to London to study architecture, qualifying in
1957.
Between 1957 and 1989, Geoffrey Bawa took charge of the
established Sri Lankan architectural firm Edwards Reid and Begg. He left
in 1990 to create his own firm, Geoffrey Bawa Associates. Throughout,
Bawa developed and refined a new style of modernist architecture
suitable to the tropical climates.
Bawa began by designing and supervising the construction of
residential properties, office buildings, churches, and schools. He is
noted for deconstructing the traditional layout of constituent rooms by
creating semi-enclosed spaces which include terraces, garden rooms,
garden roofs, and courtyards. His office buildings addressed the
particular needs of the workplace in a tropical environment, including
cantilevered floors and breathing walls.
Bawa's most iconic building was the new Sri Lankan parliamentary
buildings constructed in 1979. It was designed as an island capital
surrounded by parkland and a new lake. The building itself is a main
pavilion surrounded and connected by five satellite pavilions. This is
one of Bawa's most revered and praised buildings today.
A significant number of international awards and honors have been
bestowed on Bawa. He is an honorary fellow of the American Institute of
Architects, received the Architect of the Year in London (1996), the
Aga Khan Award For Architecture for lifetime achievement (2001), and
many more. His work has often been the subject of retrospectives around
the world. Unfortunately, he was felled by a stroke in 1998 that ended
his productive career, and he passed away in 2003.
His influence on global architecture is undeniable. Firstly, he
tutored and mentor subsequent generations of prominent modernist
architects. His work is highly regarded in many countries, including
Singapore, Japan, Thailand, and India. Today, the Geoffrey Bawa Trust
administers his estate, provides scholarships and lectures, and presents
architecture awards.
Geoffrey Bawa was considered eccentric because of his homosexual
lifestyle. Elements of this easily transferred to his design,
particularly in the garden elements – they are very decorative and
eclectic, incorporating an English aspect into the traditional tropical
landscape. These included the creation of vistas and walkways that were
sensual, but also which are filled with wonder and gay in-jokes along
the way (including male nudes and sculpture, or a sleeping naked man
etched into a concrete bench).
His brother, Bevis Bawa, was also gay and
served as Aide de Campe for four successive Sri Lankan Governor
Generals.
Geoffrey Bawa had a notable relationship with gay Australian
artist Donald Friend. They joined forces in advancing this new LGBTQ
influenced aesthetic into tropical architecture.
Original Link
http://queerbio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Geoffrey_Bawa
Peek and breathe in the hedonistic life of self-declared and self-taught
artist Bevis Bawa and enjoy his former fairy tale garden and mansion.
Bevis, whose brother Geoffrey was one of the most important Sri Lankan
architect, did not have a regular Sri Lankan life-style; first, he never
had to care about money, he had a rich papa who bought for example the
estate under discussion. Second, he was gay, a hardcore crime according
to (former) Ceylonese culture. Third, he smoked 50 cigarettes a day,
drank whiskey excessively and organised his own sex orgies in his
beautifully designed garden. During his life time dozens of artists
stayed at his estate and benefited from the inspiring atmosphere on this
former rubber plantation. The Australian artist Donald Friend
supposedly stayed five years even though he wanted to stay one week
only. Not only shared these two men the passion for art, but also their
beds or at least there passion for adolescent boys. All the above life
information about Bevis Bawa will help you to interpret and understand
the kind of statues placed in the different corners of the garden and
the villa.
link 1 - http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/tom-daley-dustin-lance-black-5382723 link 2 - http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/tom-daley-dustin-lance-black-5382723
At the request of the Department of Health this public
information
was prepared by the UK Council for Psychotherapy with the
support
and assistance of the British Psychoanalytic Council, the
Royal
College of Psychiatrists, the British Association for
Counselling
and Psychotherapy, the British Psychological Society, The
National
Counselling Society, Pink Therapy, Stonewall, PACE and
Relate
June 2014
"Why do therapy professionals consider conversion
therapy
unethical?
The major therapy professional bodies in the UK have been
united in speaking out against conversion therapy. This is because this
particular approach is based on the assumption that homosexuality is a mental
disorder, or begins from the pre-conceived view that the client should change
their sexual
orientation.
As homosexuality is
not an illness, it is both logically and ethically flawed to offer any kind of
treatment.Conversion therapy suggests to vulnerable people that their sexuality
is the root cause of their difficulties.
This is misleading and prejudiced. Questions around
sexuality and identity can be challenging and difficult. Nevertheless, we
believe it would be irresponsible and
potentially damaging for a therapist to offer to try and
change sexual orientation.
The UK Council for Psychotherapy states:
‘It is exploitative for a psychotherapist to offer treatment
that might ‘cure’ or ‘reduce’ same sex attraction as to do so would be offering
a treatment for which there is no illness.’
The British Association for Counselling and
Psychotherapy says:
‘There is no scientific, rational or ethical reason to treat
people who identify within a range of human sexualities any differently from
those who identify solely as
heterosexual.’
The British Psychological Society has published guidance
which says:
‘As same-sex sexual orientations... are not diagnosable
illnesses, they do not require any therapeutic interventions to change them.’
The British Psychoanalytic Council states:
‘The BPC does not accept that a homosexual
orientation is evidence of disturbance of the mind or in
development. In psychoanalytic psychotherapy, it is the quality of people’s
relationships which are explored,
whether they are heterosexual or homosexual.’
The Royal College of Psychiatrists states:
‘The Royal College of Psychiatrists believes strongly in
evidence-based treatment. There is no sound scientific evidence that sexual
orientation can be changed. Furthermore, so-called treatments of homosexuality
create a setting in which prejudice and discrimination
flourish.’
What does research tell us about conversion therapy?
All treatments must be both ethical and effective before
being recommended by professional bodies or adopted by services such as the
NHS. As already noted, same-sex attraction and sexual behaviour are not mental
disorders needing treatment.
Nevertheless, there are claims conversion therapy should be
available to people distressed by their same sex attraction. So is there any
evidence that such therapy can change sexual orientation?
Randomised controlled trials are the scientific gold
standard for assessing the effectiveness of treatments. There are no randomised
trials of conversion therapies.
Recent systematic reviews of the evidence for conversion
therapy suggest that studies which have shown it to be successful are seriously
methodologically flawed.Oral history studies of people who underwent treatments
(such as aversion therapy) for homosexuality in the 1970s and 1980s also show
there is a potential for harm.
We believe that offering to change a person’s sexual
orientation or control his or her same sex attraction would be likely to
reinforce the notion that these feelings are wrong or abnormal. For wider
society, it also perpetuates the mistaken belief that homosexuality is a
disorder needing treatment.
To see more detailed statements on conversion therapy from
professional bodies in the UK please go to the
" In its 2000 position statement on “reparative” therapy, states:
Psychotherapeutic modalities to convert or “repair” homosexuality are based on developmental theories whose scientific validity is questionable. Furthermore, anecdotal reports of “cures” are counterbalanced by anecdotal claims of psychological harm. In the last four decades, “reparative” therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, the American Psychiatric Association recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to changeindividuals’ sexual orientation, keeping in mind the medical dictum to first, do no harm.
The potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior, since therapist alignment with societal prejudices against homosexuality may reinforce self-hatred already experienced by the patient.Many patients who have undergone reparative therapy relate that they were inaccurately told that homosexuals are lonely, unhappy individuals who never achieve acceptance or satisfaction. The possibility that the person might achieve happiness and satisfying interpersonal relationships as a gay man or lesbian is not presented, nor are alternative approaches to dealing with the effects of societal stigmatization discussed.
Therefore, the American Psychiatric Association opposes any psychiatric treatment, such as reparative or conversion therapy which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that the patient should change his/her sexual homosexual orientation."
The American Academy of Pediatrics
" Avoid any treatments that claim to be able to change a person’s sexual orientation,....."
The American Counseling Association
" in April 1999, the The American Counseling Association's Governing Council adopted a position opposing the promotion of “reparative therapy” as a “cure” for individuals who are homosexual."
Source http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/just-the-facts.aspx
American Psychological Association says like this
"The task force conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed
journal literature on sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) and
concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be
successful and involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE
practitioners and advocates.
from
Report of the APA Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation
American Psychological Association"
American Psychological Association further says like this
"All major national mental health organizations have officially
expressed concerns about therapies promoted to modify sexual
orientation. To date, there has been no scientifically adequate research
to show that therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation (sometimes
called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective.
Furthermore, it seems likely that the promotion of change therapies
reinforces stereotypes and contributes to a negative climate for
lesbian, gay and bisexual persons."
source - American Psychological Association
link - http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.aspx
Royal College of Psychiatrists UK
says like this
"The British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy has recently
completed a systematic review of the world’s literature on LGB people’s
experiences with psychotherapy (King et al., 2007). This evidence shows
that although LGB people are open to seeking help with mental health
problems they may be misunderstood by therapists who regard their
homosexuality as the root cause of any presenting problem such as
depression or anxiety.
Unfortunately, therapists who behave in this way cause considerable
distress. A small minority of therapists will even go so far as to
attempt to change their client’s sexual orientation (Bartlett et al,
2001). This can be deeply damaging. Although there is now a number of
therapists and organisation in the USA and in the UK that claim that
therapy can help homosexuals to become heterosexual, there is no
evidence that such change is possible.
Meanwhile, we know from historical evidence that treatments to change
sexual orientation that were common in the 1960s and 1970s were very
damaging to those patients who underwent them and affected no change in
their sexual orientation (King, M. and Bartlett, A., 1999). "
source - Royal College of Psychiatrists UK 2015
link -
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/members/specialinterestgroups/gaylesbian/submissiontothecofe/psychiatryandlgbpeople.aspx
link - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2415718/Prison-Break-star-Wentworth-Miller-How-keeping-sexuality-secret-prompted-suicide-attempts.html
video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLRWDAfOzvA
video 1- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oBraB9goXI video 2-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mkeGPoTXOY video 3-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoMH3uiha1Y
