High Court directs police to protect Bathinda lesbian couple

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court on Wednesday directed police protection for a Bathinda lesbian couple facing death threats.

Swaran Kaur, 20, a police constable, and her childhood friend, Harsharan Kaur, 28, moved the court, saying they have been forced to go into hiding as their families were threatening to kill them for their relationship. The couple, from Bathinda district's Blahar Vinjhu village, have been staying together for the last nine months. They appeared before the court briefly.

"Hardeep Kaur (mother), Harbhajan Kaur (sister), Jaswinder Singh (brother) are family members of Harsharan Kaur, and Jagpal Dass (father), Mukhtiar Kaur (mother), Bhupinder Singh (brother) are family members of Swaran Kaur, who are opposing our relationship," they told the court.

The couple sought protection citing the Delhi high court's 2009 judgment legalizing same sex relationship. The two pleaded that that they are in a lesbian relationship which is not punishable under any provision of law. They said they moved the court for protection only after they failed to settle the matter amicably. "Our adamant family members are bent on eliminating us,'' they said.

"We have not committed any offence. We are major and capable of differentiating between right and wrong. We are living in hiding and can be eliminated when traced by our families," the couple said in their petition.

Swaran, who is posted at Maur police station in Bathinda, said she is in government service and could maintain her partner as in any other relationship. She told the court that the Bathinda SSP ignored her plea to provide them protection from their families.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/High-Court-directs-police-to-protect-Bathinda-lesbian-couple/articleshow/12874220.cms

Centre opposes decriminalisation of homosexuality in SC

NEW DELHI: The Centre on Thursday opposed dilution of Section 377 of Indian Penal Code by Delhi high court, which decriminalised sexual act in private between consenting adults. It tells SC that the HC erred because a vast section of Indian society still considered it to be an immoral act, hence the provision needs to be retained in full to reflect the society's views. Though the Centre had not appeal against the judgement, the ministry of Home affairs came out strongly against dilution of Section 377.

When the SC asked who decides what is immoral, the Union government said the society did so and argued that the laws can not but reflect the views of the society, which in India considers homosexuality as immoral. The government said the HC considered judgements of Foreigncountries alone where homosexuality may not be resented.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Centre-opposes-decriminalisation-of-homosexuality-in-SC/articleshow/12001626.cms

India’s first legally recognized lesbian married couple live under threat of death

Today while looking through news headlines online, I noticed “India’s First Married Lesbian Couple Under Constant Police Protection” from the Oregon-based LGBT website Just Out. And further down the list of headlines was this one: “In a first, Gurgaon court recognizes lesbian marriage,” taken from The Times of India.
I read both stories, trying to piece together as much information as possible about this historic couple, and about the apparently constant state of danger in which they live. Then I went out and started looking for other news reports about the couple, since the two referenced above seemed to contradict each other in a couple of places. The Hindustan Times in Indian offered this report. The headline here reads “Same-sex couple fears for life.”
There are a few things I am not quite sure on yet — for instance, the Times of India story talks about “khap panchayats,” and I don’t know what those are. But since these “khap panchayats” have been linked to so-called “honor killings,” I am pretty sure they aren’t good.
But here is the story as I understand it, based on what I have read so far:
Beena, 20, and Savita, 25, have been friends for many years, maybe as long as 15 years. Beena (spelled”Veena” in one report) has always been very boyish, and has always been accepted by her family who treat her as a boy. Savita, who is studying for a college degree, was forced by her family to marry a man late last year. Within five months, she ran away from her husband, got a divorce from a khap panchayat and went to live with Beena.
On July 22, according to Times of India, the two women went to a public notary in Gurgaon and got married by signing an affidavit that said, basically, they were marrying each other and were not being coerced into doing so. Then they ended up going to court to ask for police protection because certain people — namely members of Savita’s own family — were threatening to kill them because through their relationship they had besmirched the honor of Savita’s family.
In court proceedings, as best I can tell, the judge basically gave their marriage legal recognition simply by not disputing their declarations that they were married.
That’s an over-simplification of the things I read, and may not be exactly accurate, but I think that’s the basic gist of it. And by the way, two other points to mention, the high court in Delhi decriminalized same-sex relationships back in 2009, and Beena’s family members have said they accept the two women’s relationship.
There are two things about this story that really stand out in my mind. First, these two women appear to have been able to be legally married simply by filling out a form and then declaring themselves married. I wish it were that simple here in Texas (or anywhere in the U.S.).
Second, even though Beena and Savita appear to have managed a legal same-sex marriage, they had to put their lives on the line to do so. Trust me, the threat to these two women’s lives is very real. This report by National Geographic in 2002 says that “Hundreds, if not thousands, of women are murdered by their families each year in the name of ‘honor.’” A study published in 2008 by Gendercide.org says that such murders, while more common in Islamic countries, are on the rise worldwide.
And according to this Wikipedia article, the United Nations Population Fund estimates that as many as 5,000 women and girls are murdered in honor killings each year. Need more evidence? Then read this story about three young women, two sisters and a woman who had eloped with her boyfriend, who were murdered in two separate honor killing incidents within 24 hours of each other earlier this month in India.
Even though honor killings, at least in most places, are illegal, those commit such crimes often get away with it because authorities look the other way, so to speak. (In some countries, though, such killings are not just allowed, but required by law.)
Reading all this made me think about how easy we have it here in the U.S., in so many ways. I mean, sure, there are a lot of anti-LGBT folks out there who want to deny us our civil rights, and who, in many cases, get their way. And yes, the Republican Party Platform in Texas calls for recriminalizing same-sex sexual contact. And yes, I am sure that if some people had their way, “honor killings” of LGBT people would be the law of the land.
But the fact is, those people don’t get their way — at least not to that extent. And there are six states in the United States, plus the District of Columbia, that legally recognize same-sex marriage. More than one federal court has already declared that the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, is unconstitutional, and a bill has been introduced in Congress to repeal it.
Yes, lots of people have had to fight long and hard for us to reach the place we are now, and we have a long, hard fight still ahead to finally gain full equality. But from now on, when I started getting aggravated about the seemingly slow pace of our progress, when I start feeling discouraged because the government does not recognize my marriage — well, I will just rememberto stop and think about Beena and Savita. Sure, there are people who don’t like the idea of my wife and I being married. But at least our family members aren’t hiding out there somewhere, lying in wait to murder us over it.

http://www.dallasvoice.com/indias-legally-recognized-lesbian-married-couple-live-threat-death-1084803.html

Le ministre indien de la Santé s'est défendu mardi de tenir l'homosexualité pour une maladie

Le ministre indien de la Santé s'est défendu mardi de tenir l'homosexualité pour une maladie, affirmant que les propos choquants lui ayant été prêtés sur ce sujet étaient "totalement déformés".

"Comme ministre de la Santé, je sais qu'un homme ayant des relations sexuelles avec un homme, ce n'est pas une maladie", a déclaré Ghulam Nabi Azad, lors d'un point presse organisé après une vague de protestations soulevée par des propos tenus la veille mais "totalement déformés" selon lui.

Lorsqu'il parlait de "maladie", il se référait au virus du sida, et non à l'homosexualité, a précisé le ministre, dont la communauté homosexuelle réclamait des excuses immédiates.

M. Azad participait lundi à une conférence nationale sur le sida à New Delhi et à cette occasion, il avait déclaré que "les relations sexuelles entre homme étaient anormales et pas bonnes pour l'Inde", selon une traduction de ses propos, originellement tenus en hindi.

"C'est une maladie venue d'autres pays. Même si ce n'est pas naturel, cela existe dans notre pays et se diffuse désormais rapidement, ce qui la rend difficile à déceler", selon cette traduction.

Ces remarques ont déclenché les foudres des mouvements indiens de défense des droits des homosexuels qui, après une longue bataille, ont obtenu en 2009 la dépénalisation des relations homosexuelles, inscrite dans la loi sous la période coloniale 150 ans plus tôt. Jusque là, l'homosexualité était passible d'amende et de prison.

Invité à revenir en détail sur ses propres déclarations, M. Azad a refusé pour "ne pas entrer dans la polémique" et il a assuré n'avoir eu nulle "intention de blesser la sensibilité de quiconque dans la société".

Il a souligné que les nombreux cas de Sida parmi les homosexuels hommes était une source de préoccupation. "C'est inquiétant pour le ministre de la Santé que je suis. Je nourris une inquiétude envers leur sort, et non contre eux", a-t-il ajouté.

Même si les relations homosexuelles ont été légalisées en 2009, le sujet reste tabou pour la plupart des Indiens. Aucune personnalité du monde sportif, politique ou du spectacle ne s'est ouvertement déclarée gay ou lesbienne.

http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualite/societe/20110705.AFP6266/inde-les-homosexuels-choques-par-les-remarques-d-un-ministre.html

India health minister: Gay sex is a disease

India's health minister has said homosexuality is a "disease" which is "spreading fast" in the country.

Ghulam Nabi Azad also told a meeting that gay sex was "unnatural". Activists said his comments were "unfortunate".

Gay sex was decriminalised in the country in a landmark judgement in 2009.

The ruling was widely welcomed by India's gay community, which said the order would help protect them from harassment and persecution.

Mr Azad told a meeting on HIV/Aids in Delhi on Monday that gay sex "which was found more in the developed world, has now unfortunately come to our country and there is a substantial number of such people in India".

"Even through it [homosexuality] is unnatural, it exists in our country and is now fast spreading, making it tough to detect it," he said.

"With relationships changing, men are having sex with men now. Though it is easy to find women sex workers and educate them on sex, it is a challenge to identify men having sex with men."

Anand Grover, United Nations special rapporteur on health, criticised Mr Azad's comments.

"It's unfortunate, regrettable and totally unacceptable that a minister of his stature... is still insensitive to a vulnerable groups such as MSM [men who have sex with men]," Hindustan Times newspaper quoted him as saying.

According to one estimate, more than 8% of homosexual men in India were infected with HIV, compared to a less than 1% infection rate in the general population.

The 2009 court ruling overturned a 148-year-old colonial law which described a same-sex relationship as an "unnatural offence".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14024774