Please select your page

LGBT Discrimination: Hate Speech and Violence Misprocessed

The Provincial Ombudsman supported the Hate Free Zone event held on 27 June, the World Pride Day. The event was organized by a pool of local NGOs active in the LGBT field and wishing to point out the existing intolerance towards members of the LGBT population and other vulnerable social groups.

LGBT population is one of the most vulnerable social groups facing marginalization, discrimination, hate speech, bullying, threats and homophobic violence day-to-day. The situation worsens as their visibility increases, holds the Provincial Ombudsman.

LGBT discrimination, hate speech and violence cases are mostly misprocessed. The police, public prosecutor’s offices and courts are also extremely slow and inefficient when handling violence against LGBT people. This population is often discriminated and harassed at work, where their employers fail to undertake any measures to protect them from discrimination. The position of LGBT population is reflected in the fact that it is the only social group disputed its right to public assembly, despite the fact that it is granted by the Constitution.

By adopting the international human rights conventions, Serbia has also got a duty of not only having relevant national antidiscrimination legislation adopted by its Parliament, but of its observance and exercise. Besides the Serbian Constitution (Art. 21), LGBT related antidiscrimination provisions are also found in the Antidiscrimination Law (Art. 21) and the Criminal Code (Art. 54), as well as the employment, radio-diffusion, public information and university level education laws and the Provincial Parliamentary Decision on Gender Equality.

The major problem in the LGBT discrimination respect is the lack of mechanisms and will to enforce exercise of the existing legislation, as well as insufficient promotion of LGBT tolerance on behalf of the authorities. The most obvious example is the case of the third time postponed Serbian Pride during the last four years. Not only is it a violation of a constitutionally granted right to free assembly, but the 2011 ruling of the Serbian Constitutional Court also states that the authorities have violated this right by banning the Pride event in 2009. The fact that over 50 percent of the interviewees in a research study of the Serbian Equality Protection Commissioner concerning LGBT rights hold that homosexuality is a disease, whereas over 60 percent claim that their colleagues have discriminatory attitudes towards the LGBT people and treat them in such a way. 

Serbia has no legislation regulating the same-sex partnerships and consequential issues. Notary public offices have a tendency to interpret existing legislation to the detriment of the LGBT people. The Provincial Ombudsman had a case when such an office refused to issue a certificate of (a single) marital status for the purpose of civil partnership abroad. The explanation was that such a partnership is not constitutional and that there is no possibility for same-sex marriages of registering a civil partnership. The Provincial Ombudsman issued a Recommendation stating that the practice in cases of issuing certificates to citizens should be uniform: the notary public is bound by law to issue such a certificate to persons legally entitled to it.

Public figures, such as officials and celebrities, still express their anti-LGBT attitudes, though their responsibility lies also with the general public. The education system also has two major issues re. this population: not only does it lack the will to do away with sexual orientation based peer violence and discrimination, but the relevant ministry still has to introduce textbook contents dealing with LGBT rights in a learned and respectful way.

Medical procedures and physical gender alteration must be followed by changes in the civic status (e.g. getting a new personal ID No, a new educational degree, etc.), so the transformation would include be complete formally and identity wise as well. This is why the NGOs advocate for adoption of a Gender Identity Law that would regulate the rights of transgender persons, as well as amendments of the existing healthcare, insurance and public recordkeeping laws.