On 20 April a hearing took place at the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights on the case of Khamtokhu and Aksenchik v Russia in which the Court will decide whether two men convicted of crimes in Russia have been victims of gender and age discrimination, due to legislation which allows life sentences to be given only to men between the ages of 18 and 65.
This report is produced by RAA Sachsen (Saxony), a German civil society organisation who provide counselling services to victims of hate crime, in participation with a number of partner organisations. It is the result of their project, "Standards and Guidelines for Victims of Hate Crime in Europe", aimed at improving support structures and the situation of victims of hate crimes. The document presents suggested guidelines, recommendations and necessary framework requirements for efficient counselling services throughout Europe.
The Obergefell v Hodges case concerned two men whose same-sex partners had died and fourteen same-sex couples who all brought cases in their respective District Courts challenging either the denial of their right to marry or the right to have their marriage performed elsewhere recognised in their own state.
The case concerns the constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which was
enacted during the British administration in India in 1860. Section 377 created an offence of
voluntarily having carnal intercourse ?against the order of nature? with any man, woman or
animal, punishable by up to ten years imprisonment or a fine. Although the provision appears to
be neutral on its face, it was argued to have a discriminatory effect on LGBT persons,
particularly homosexual men.
UK Supreme Court judgment in relation to direct discrimination by Christian hotel owners of same-sex civil partners.
The Equal Rights Trust Submission to the Parliamentary Commission on Human Rights and National Minorities and the Parliamentary Commission on Legal Affairs and Immunity of the Republic of Moldova on the Draft Law on Preventing and Combating Discrimination (29 March 2011)
This is the ERT Case Summary of the European Court of Human Rights decision in the case of Losonci Rose and Rose v Switzerland (application no. 664/06). The Court found a violation of Article 14 (right to non-discrimination) in conjunction with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life). The case summary sets out the refence details, facts, legal arguments and decision of the case.