ITMU Model United Nations 2013
Human Rights Council

ELIMINATION OF INTOLERANCE AND
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST, AND IMPROVING
EFFECTIVE ENJOYMENT OF LGBT RIGHTS

Dear Delegates,
We welcome you to the Human Rights Council of ITMU Model United
Nations, 2013. This background guide is aimed at giving you all a basic outline
of the agenda at hand.
The delegates are expected to research far beyond the contents of this
guide. Delegates must also note that the information contained in this guide may
be used as a basis of your research and should not form the substantive basis of
your arguments.
It is also worth mentioning here that the executive board shall appreciate
well researched delegates who are well versed with their foreign policy and
adhere to the rules of procedure.
The delegates are further advised have proof or logical reason to back
each and every argument and comment that they bring up in committee.
In case of any doubts regarding the agenda please feel free to contact the
Secretariat or the executive board. We look forward to great sessions with the
delegates.

Deepanita Das

Chairperson

Manisha Massey Vice Chairperson

THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
COMMITTEE DESCRIPTION

INTRODUCTION/STRUCTURE/BACKGROUND:
1. The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is an inter-governmental body
within the United Nations System. The UNHRC is the successor to the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR/CHR), and is a subsidiary body of
the United Nations General Assembly. The council works closely with the Office of
the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and engages the United Nations'
Special Procedures.
2. The General Assembly established the UNHRC by adopting a resolution
(A/RES/60/251) on 15 March 2006, in order to replace the previous UN Commission
on Human Rights, which had been heavily criticized for allowing countries with poor
human rights records to be members.
3. In June 2007, the Council also adopted Resolution 5/2, containing a Code of Conduct
for special procedures mandate holders (explained later).
MANDATE OF UNHRC:
1. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights supervises the Human
Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland and coordinated all human rights activities.
2. Except for the tri-annual reports on development of human rights policies, that
Member States have to submit to the Secretary General since 1956, the Human Rights
Council UPR procedure constitutes a first in the area. This mechanism demonstrates
and confirms the universal nature of human rights.
3. On 18 June 2007, one year after holding its first meeting, the UNHRC adopted its
Institution-building package, which provides elements to guide it in its future work
and related mandate. This is divided in the following three main categories:
3.1. Advisory Committee:
The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights was the
main subsidiary body of the erstwhile UNCHR. The Sub-Commission was
composed of 26 elected human rights experts whose mandate was to conduct
studies on discriminatory practices and to make recommendations to ensure that
racial, national, religious, and linguistic minorities are protected by law. In
September 2007, the Human Rights Council decided to create this into an
Advisory Committee to provide expert advice.
Its primary mandate is described as:



"To undertake studies, particularly in the light of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, and to make recommendations to the Commission concerning the
prevention of discrimination of any kind relating to human rights and fundamental
freedoms and the protection of racial, national, religious and linguistic minorities."
Other functions and tasks could also be assigned to it by ECOSOC or the
Commission on Human Rights.

3.2. Complaints Procedure:
On 18 June 2007, the UNHRC adopted Resolution 5/1 to establish a Complaint
Procedure. The Complaint Procedure's purpose is to address consistent patterns of
gross and reliably attested violations of all human rights and all fundamental
freedoms occurring in any part of the world and under any circumstances. Two
working groups make up the Complaint Procedure: the Working Group on
Communications (WGC) and the Working Group on Situations (WGS).
3.3 Universal Periodic Review:
The United Nations Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review is a
process which involves a review of the human rights records of all United Nations
(UN) Member States once every four years. Each country's situation will be
examined during a three-hour debate.
4. The UNHRC is a subsidiary body of the United Nations General Assembly. The
General Assembly can suspend the rights and privileges of any Council member that
it decides has persistently committed gross and systematic violations of human rights
during its term of membership. The suspension process requires a two-thirds majority
vote by the General Assembly.
I.

STRUCTURE
1. The members of the General Assembly elect the members who occupy the UNHRC's
forty-seven seats. The term of each seat is three years, and no member may occupy a
seat for more than two consecutive terms. The seats are distributed among the UN's
regional groups as follows: 13 for Africa, 13 for Asia, six for Eastern Europe, eight
for Latin America and the Caribbean, and seven for the Western European and Others
Group.

II.

ROLE OF SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR:
1. Special Rapporteur is a title given to individuals working on behalf of the United
Nations who bear a specific mandate from the UN Human Rights Council to
investigate, monitor and recommend solutions to human rights problems. They are
also called "Special Procedures". Some of these experts are called Special
Representatives or Independent Experts. They address either specific country

situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Currently, there are 31 thematic
and 8 country mandates.
III.

MANDATE AND
RAPPORTEUR:

OTHER

KEY

FEATURES

OF

THE

SPECIAL

 The mandates of the special procedures are established and defined by the resolution
creating them. Mandate-holders of the special procedures serve in their personal
capacity, and do not receive salaries or any other financial compensation for their
work.
 They are appointed by the UN Secretary General,
 They act independently of governments.
 They receive personnel and logistical support from the Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights.
 Country Special Rapporteurs conduct fact-finding missions to countries to investigate
allegations of human rights violations. They can only visit countries that have agreed
to invite them. After their visits, special procedures' mandate-holders issue a mission
report containing their findings and recommendations.
 Aside from fact-finding missions, Rapporteurs regularly assess and verify complaints
from alleged victims of human rights violations. Once a complaint is verified as
legitimate, an urgent letter or appeal is sent to the government that has allegedly
committed the violation.
 Special procedures also include Working Groups made up of legal experts who
monitor and investigate specific human rights concerns. There are currently four such
groups:
IV.

AREAS OF WORK FOR THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR:

 The Council also approved candidates for its Special Procedures on: the right to
adequate housing, the right to food, human rights of indigenous people, sale of
children, effects of economic reform policies, human rights in Myanmar, human
rights in the Palestinian territories, human rights and extreme poverty, contemporary
forms of slavery, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, people of African
descent, human rights in Somalia and human rights defenders.

UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
 The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a unique process which involves a
review of the human rights records of all 192 UN Member States once every
four years. The UPR is a State-driven process, under the auspices of the

Human Rights Council, which provides the opportunity for each State to
declare what actions they have taken to improve the human rights situations in
their countries and to fulfil their human rights obligations. As one of the main
features of the Council, the UPR is designed to ensure equal treatment for
every country when their human rights situations are assessed.
 By 2011, it will have reviewed the human rights records of every
country. Currently, no other universal mechanism of this kind exists. The UPR
is one of the key elements of the new Council which reminds States of their
responsibility to fully respect and implement all human rights and fundamental
freedoms. The ultimate aim of this new mechanism is to improve the human
rights situation in all countries and address human rights violations wherever
they occur.
THE OUTCOMES
 Following the State review by the Working Group a report is prepared with
the involvement of the State under review and assistance from the
OHCHR. This report, referred to as the “outcome report”, provides a summary
of the actual discussion. It therefore consists of the questions, comments and
recommendations made by States to the country under review, as well as the
responses by the reviewed State.
 The State has the primary responsibility to implement the recommendations
contained in the final outcome. The UPR ensures that all countries are
accountable for progress or failure in implementing these
recommendations. When it comes time for the second review of a State they
must provide information on what they have been doing to implement the
recommendations made during the 1st review four years earlier. The
international community will assist in implementing the recommendations and
conclusions regarding capacity-building and technical assistance, in
consultation with the country concerned. If necessary, the Council will address
cases where States are not cooperating.
 The Human Rights Council will decide on the measures it would need to take
in case of persistent non-cooperation by a State with the UPR.

The Nature of Proof/ Evidence in Council

Evidence or proof is acceptable from the following sources:
News Sources:
 REUTERS – Any Reuters article which clearly makes mention of the fact or is in
contradiction of the fact being stated by a delegate in council.
http://www.reuters.com/
 State operated News Agencies – These reports can be used in the support of or against
the State that owns the News Agency. These reports, if credible or substantial enough,
can be used in support of or against any Country as such but in that situation, they can be
denied by any other country in the council. Some examples are,
 RIA Novosti (Russia) http://en.rian.ru/
 IRNA (Iran) http://www.irna.ir/ENIndex.htm
 BBC (United Kingdom) http://www.bbc.co.uk/
Government Reports:
These reports can be used in a similar way as the State Operated News Agencies reports and
can, in all circumstances, be denied by another country. However, a nuance is that a report
that is being denied by a certain country can still be accepted by the Executive Board as
credible information. Examples are,
 Government Websites like the State Department of the United States of America
http://www.state.gov/index.htm or the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
http://www.eng.mil.ru/en/index.htm
 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of various nations like India(http://www.mea.gov.in/),
People’s Republic of China(http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/),
France(http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/), Russian
Federation(http://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf/main_eng)
 Permanent Representatives to the United Nations Reports
http://www.un.org/en/members/ (Click on any country to get the website of the Office
of its Permanent Representative.
 Multilateral Organizations like the NATO
(http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/index.htm), ASEAN (http://www.aseansec.org/),
OPEC (http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/), etc.
UN Reports:
All UN Reports are considered as credible information or evidence for the Executive Board
of the Security Council.


UN Bodies: Like the SC (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/), GA
(http://www.un.org/en/ga/), HRC
(http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/HRCIndex.aspx) etc.
 UN Affiliated bodies like the International Atomic Energy Agency
(http://www.iaea.org/), World Bank (http://www.worldbank.org/), International

Monetary Fund (http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm), International Committee of
the Red Cross (http://www.icrc.org/eng/index.jsp), etc.
 Treaty Based Bodies like the Antarctic Treaty System (http://www.ats.aq/e/ats.htm),
the International Criminal Court (http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC)

Under no circumstances will sources like Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org/),
Amnesty International (http://www.amnesty.org/), or newspapers like the Guardian
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/), Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/), etc. be
accepted.

ELIMINATION OF INTOLERANCE AND
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST, AND IMPROVING
EFFECTIVE ENJOYMENT OF LGBT RIGHTS

The Secretary-General in his speech on Human Rights Day 2010 stated, “As men and
women of conscience, we reject discrimination in general, and in particular discrimination
based on sexual orientation and gender identity … Where there is a tension between cultural
attitudes and universal human rights, rights must carry the day. Together, we seek the repeal
of laws that criminalize homosexuality, that permit discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation or gender identity, that encourage violence.”
In all regions, people experience violence and discrimination because of their sexual
orientation or gender identity. In many cases, even the perception of homosexuality or
transgender identity puts people at risk. Violations include – but are not limited to – killings,
rape and physical attacks, torture, arbitrary detention, the denial of rights to assembly,
expression and information, and discrimination in employment, health and education.
Listed below are various questions as to the rights of the LGBT community. Apart
from the recognition of rights corresponding measures of protection are also to be discussed.

LGBT Related Issues at hand
 Decriminalisation
Laws criminalise same-sex sexual conduct in several countries around the world.
They are often referred to as sodomy laws. Sometimes these laws criminalise specific sexual
acts, such as anal and oral sex, regardless of the sex of the partners. Sometimes they
criminalise any kind of sexual contact between partners of the same sex. The majority focus
on sex between men, although recently both Botswana and Malawi have enacted laws
criminalising lesbian sex. Occasionally the laws are drafted with great precision, but more
commonly they use language such as “carnal knowledge against the order of nature” or
“gross indecency”. These are usually known as morals offences and are justified by reference
to tradition, popular opinion, and public morality. What they share is that they all make
private sexual activity between consenting adults illegal.
Internationally, in 1994 the UN Human Rights Committee decided (in the case of
Toonen v. Australia) that Tasmania’s sodomy laws violated Articles 17 and 26 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In so doing, it rejected
Tasmania’s public morality justification. Since Toonen, the Human Rights Committee and
other UN treaty bodies have repeatedly urged States to decriminalise consensual same-sex
sexual conduct. However several nations still retain criminal liability.

 Universality, Equality and Non-Discrimination
Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides: “All human beings
are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” The Preamble of the ICCPR recognises that
“the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of
freedom, justice and peace in the world”. Every regional human rights instruments also refers
to the universality of rights. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted
unanimously by all States at the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, states:
“Human rights and fundamental freedoms are the birth right of all human beings; their
protection and promotion is the first responsibility of Governments”. What this should mean

is that every human being, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, is entitled to
the full enjoyment of all human rights.
Though in general terms all the question at hand fit into this heading of universality,
equality and non-discrimination herein under only cases of explicit treatment of the subjects
are to be discussed. The same can be understood in reference to certain case laws like Romer
v. Evans1and Sunil Babu Pant & Others v. Nepal Government and Others.2

 Employment Discrimination
Article 6 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights obliges States
Parties to “recognise the right to work, which includes the right of everyone to the
opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts”. When LGBT
individuals challenge job-related decisions based on their sexual orientation and gender
identity, they are asserting the right to be treated as equal citizens in matters of employment.
For many years this was a controversial proposition. Where same-sex sexual conduct was
criminalised, States often enacted statutory prohibitions on employment. Even criminal laws
had not been passed, terms such as “moral turpitude” or “immoral behaviour” were often
used to bar gay men and lesbian women from jobs. Certain fields of employment, especially
teaching and police professions, were essentially closed to people who were suspected of or
who admitted to being gay or lesbian. Transgender individuals still frequently stand to lose
jobs (or job offers) when they are in the process of gender transitioning.

 Freedom of Assembly, Association and Expression
The rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly are grouped
together because they are often intertwined. Freedom of expression is frequently a necessary
component of the rights to freedom of assembly and association when people join together
for an expressive purpose. All three are protected in international and regional human rights
instruments and are considered essential to the functioning of a pluralistic and democratic
society. Human rights activists also need to be able to exercise these rights to do their work.
The ability of LGBT individuals and organisations to organise, mobilise, and speak
out on matters of sexuality is often restricted. Historically, discussion of homosexuality was
1
2

th

Supreme Court of the United States (20 May, 1996).
st
Supreme Court of Nepal (21 December, 2007).

frequently prohibited in the name of public morality. In 1988, for example, the United
Kingdom adopted Section 28 of the Local Government Act, which prohibited local
authorities from “promot[ing] homosexuality or publish[ing] material with the intention of
promoting homosexuality”. Local authorities were also prohibited from teaching in schools
about “the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship”. Although
Section 28 has since been repealed, similar laws are exist elsewhere.
Although public morality is expressly a legitimate purpose justifying restriction of the
rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association in the ICCPR, courts
have been alert to ensure that “public morality” does not mask prejudice. They have
distinguished between a genuine public morality and one that merely reflects majority
opinion.

 Military Service
Whether gays and lesbians may serve openly in the armed forces is an issue that
continues to confront courts and legislatures around the world. At least twenty five countries,
including Canada, Germany, France, and The Netherlands, currently permit gay and lesbian
service members. Some countries never introduced an express ban on military service, while
in others bans were repealed either through legislative or judicial action.
The United States had initially banned gays and lesbians from serving openly in the
military (10 U.S.C. 654) which was referred to as “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” However, on
December 18, 2010, Congress passed a law to repeal this law and in September 20, 2011 the
repeal became effective. In 2000, Canada released a report declaring that following the repeal
of the law prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the military in 1992 it has been found that
gays do not undermine the performance of the Canadian military and that self-identified gays,
lesbians and transsexuals interviewed had reported good working relations with their peers.
Moreover, of the assault cases reported from 1992 to 1995, none were attributed to gay
bashing or sexual orientation of parties involved. As a result, the Canadian case is often
raised as an example that allowing homosexuals in the military service will not undermine the
performance of the military. Even so, many countries still ban homosexuals from serving in
the military. While Italy does not prohibit homosexuals from serving in the military, if the
presence of a gay service member disrupts discipline, he could be dismissed from service.

Moreover, a law in Italy allows gays to avoid serving in the military based on their sexual
orientation.
Thus, the laws prohibiting discrimination in the military may not be successful if they
are not enforced properly and as such stricter enforcement is required.

 Intersex
The term “intersex” refers to a range of anatomical conditions that do not fall within
standard male and female categories. They may be the result of variations in an individual’s
chromosomes, hormones, gonads, or genitalia. For example, having one ovary and one testis,
or gonads that contain both ovarian and testicular tissue, are both intersex conditions.
Chromosomal patterns that are XXY or XO instead of XX or XY are also intersex conditions.
The genitalia of some but not all intersex individuals are not clearly identifiable as male or
female. Intersex conditions may not become apparent until puberty or later, when sterility is
an issue. Intersex is not itself a medical condition. It is better understood as a label used to
describe biological variety. The recognition of this third sex is necessary.

 Gender Expression & Cross-Dressing
One way in which law has played a role in enforcing gender norms is by prohibiting
cross-dressing. Sumptuary laws were common in medieval Europe, Elizabethan England and
colonial North America and served to regulate public attire according to occupation, class and
gender. Colonial systems exported dress regulations to many countries around the world.
Contemporary sumptuary laws, known as cross-dressing laws, have been used to target
individuals who transgress gender roles, whether they are gay, lesbian, transgender or
straight. In Sudan, for example, laws prohibiting indecent or immoral dress have been used to
punish men who wear women’s clothes as well as women who wear trousers and male
models who wear make-up. In Nigeria, laws on indecent dress have been used to fine and
imprison cross-dressing men. In Guyana, it is a crime under section 153 of the Summary
Jurisdiction (Offences) Act when “a man, in any public way or public place, for any improper
purpose, appears in female attire, or being a woman, in any public way or public place, for
any improper purpose, appears in male attire”.
Cross-dressing laws can be challenged on various grounds. One’s choice of attire may
be described as an expression of individual liberty and autonomy, or an expressive statement

protected under the right to freedom of expression. Cross-dressing may also be considered an
element of trans-identity protected under non-discrimination and equality guarantees. Early
cases, however, dealt with the textual vagueness of laws that criminalised dressing in clothing
of the opposite sex.

 Recognising Gender Identity
Transgender law covers a wide range of issues that arise when an individual’s internal
experience of gender does not correspond with the sex assigned at birth. Transgender
individuals typically face discrimination in education, employment, immigration, and child
custody decisions. They suffer high rates of hate crimes and are especially vulnerable to
physical and sexual abuse in prison. Cases involving transgender individuals are included in a
number of other chapters in this book. The cases here focus on one particular aspect of
transgender law: legal recognition of the preferred gender of a transgender individual.
Legal recognition cases most commonly arise when individuals seek to change their
sex on identity documents, such as birth certificates, passports, and national identity cards.
This right is interrelated with the transgender marriage discussed below.

 Transgender Marriage
Transgender marriage occurs when a change of gender identity is judicially
recognised in the context of marriage. Since marriage in the majority of jurisdictions is
defined in terms of opposite-sex partners, courts ask whether an individual is a man or a
woman for the purpose of the marriage statute. What does it mean to be male or female? Is a
person’s sex a biological fact, a legal construction, or a bit of both? Is one’s capacity to marry
defined by the ability to engage in penile-vaginal sex? Or is the ability to procreate
determinative?
There is a great lack of consistency. Some courts reject the notion that a person can be
legally recognised in a new sex for the purpose of marriage, even if that person has been
recognised in the new sex for other purposes. Other courts apply various tests of sexual
functionality or physical appearance. Because of the medical risks involved in the surgical
construction of male genitalia, physical appearance tests are significantly harder for
transgender men to meet than transgender women.

 Freedom of Religion and Non-Discrimination
The work of activists who campaign for LGBT equality is frequently presented as a
direct threat to religious values and institutions. The right to demand freedom from
discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity is protected by international
human rights law and by many domestic legal systems. At the same time, international law
protects the right to freedom of religion, conscience, and belief. Article 18(1) of the ICCPR
affirms that the right to freedom of thought, conscience or religion includes a person’s
“freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either
individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or
belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching”.
Under Article 18(3), the freedom to “manifest one’s religion” may only be subject to
limitations that are prescribed by law and “necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or
morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others”. A similar right is found in regional
human rights treaties and many constitutions. Given that some religious teachings declare
that same-sex sexual conduct is immoral, and some religions condemn not only same-sex
sexual activity but also LGBT individuals, conflicts between the right to freedom from
discrimination and the right to manifest one’s religion are inevitable. Some religious
individuals and organisations argue that compliance with non-discrimination norms limits
their right to freedom of religion; Some commentators claim that removing religion from the
public sphere closets religious identity. Judicial systems of various nations are often expected
to balance the tension between the two sets of rights.
Religiously motivated disapproval of homosexuality may be manifested publicly or
privately, by an individual, by religious institutions and private businesses, or by State
employees. In two of the cases included here, the conflict was generated by the restrictions
that religious institutions imposed on individuals who asserted a gay identity.

 Parenting
Article 23 of the ICCPR protects the “right of men and women of marriageable age to
marry and to found a family”. Similar rights to founding or raising a family are protected in
regional human rights instruments. Do lesbian, gay, and transgender individuals have the
same right to be parents as everyone else? Does a person’s sexual orientation or gender

identity affect his or her ability to raise a child? One US court ruled that a biological father’s
homosexual relationship rendered him “an unfit and improper custodian as a matter of law”.
Even courts that did not adopt per se rules of unfitness imposed extra evidentiary burdens on
homosexual parents. Another court thus reasoned that “there are sufficient social, moral and
legal distinctions between the traditional heterosexual family relationship and illicit
homosexual relationship to raise the presumption of regularity in favour of the licit, when
established, shifting to the illicit, the burden of disproving detriment to the children”.

 Asylum and Immigration
The main international instruments governing determinations of refugee status is the
1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the
Status of Refugees. Article 1A(2) of the Convention defines a refugee as “any person who ...
owing to a 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”.
With certain exceptions that are not relevant here, the Convention prohibits State
Parties from returning refugees to their countries of origin. To qualify for refugee status,
therefore, successful applicants must demonstrate (1) a well-founded fear of persecution (2)
on one of the above-enumerated grounds and (3) lack State protection, because the State is
either unable or unwilling to provide such protection. If a person does not fulfil the
requirements for refugee status, he or she may nevertheless qualify for protection outside his
or her country of origin under other international human rights treaties.
A significant volume of research documents both the harms suffered by LGBT
individuals at the hands of State and non-State actors and how LGBT claims for asylum have
fared in various national systems. In addition, in 2008 the Office of the UN High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) published a Guidance Note on Refugee Claims
Relating to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.

 Marriage
This issue focuses on the responses of courts to demands by same-sex couples for
marriage equality. Marriage equality has been achieved by both legislative and judicial means

and court cases have often served to drive legislative reform. With the question of same sex
marriages the corresponding questions of adoption, rights in property and other rights arising
out of marriage also arise.
In the current state of international law, marriage is defined as a union of opposite sex
couples. Thus Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides: “Men and
women ... have the right to marry and to found a family”. Article 23 of the ICCPR states:
“The right of men and women of marriageable age to marry and to found a family shall be
recognized.” The terms of Article 12 of the European Convention are almost identical.
Interpreting Article 23, in Joslin v. New Zealand3 the UN Human Rights Committee
found New Zealand had not violated rights under the ICCPR because it did not provide for
same-sex marriage. The Human Rights Committee stated: “Use of the term ‘men and
women,’ rather than the general terms used elsewhere in Part III of the Covenant, has been
consistently and uniformly understood as indicating that the treaty obligation of States parties
stemming from article 23, paragraph 2, of the Covenant is to recognize as marriage only the
union between a man and a woman wishing to marry each other”.

Conclusion
The abovementioned issues at hand are aimed at furthering debate by highlighting
various aspects to de deliberated aspects in committee. The delegates are encouraged to
explore further aspects to the LGBT rights. The delegates may find helpful Refworld run by
the UNHCR.
The delegates are also advised to refer to their own national legislations and legal
systems to understand the scenarios in their respective nations. For example nations
following the Sharia are encouraged to know the provisions in the same related to the agenda
at hand.

3

Communication No. 902/1999, Views of 17 July 2002.