Tweet
Monday, on live television, Queen Elizabeth will sign a new Commonwealth Charter “designed to stamp out discrimination against homosexual people and promote the ‘empowerment’ of women – a key part of a new drive to boost human rights and living standards across the Commonwealth,” the Daily Mail reports.
Insiders say her decision to highlight the event is a ‘watershed’ moment – the first time she has clearly signalled her support for gay rights in her 61-year reign.
The charter, dubbed a ‘21st Century Commonwealth Magna Carta’ declares: ‘We are implacably opposed to all forms of discrimination, whether rooted in gender, race, colour, creed, political belief or other grounds.’
The ‘other grounds’ is intended to refer to sexuality – but specific reference to ‘gays and lesbians’ was omitted in deference to Commonwealth countries with draconian anti-gay laws.
The potential reach of the Charter is vast. The Commonwealth of Nations, formerly known as the British Commonwealth, consists of 54 independent sovereign states (see map, right). Daily Mail:
Homosexual acts are still illegal in 41 of the Commonwealth’s 54 nations. Penalties include the death sentence in parts of Nigeria and Pakistan; 25 years jail in Trinidad and Tobago; 20 years plus flogging in Malaysia; and life imprisonment in Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, Bangladesh and Guyana.
Same-sex relationships are recognised in only five Commonwealth countries: UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa.
…
Ben Summerskill, chief executive of gay and lesbian rights group Stonewall, said the Queen – who he called ‘a feminist icon’ – had taken ‘an historic step forward’ on gay rights. He said: ‘This is the first time that the Queen has publicly acknowledged the importance of the six per cent of her subjects who are gay. Some of the worst persecution of gay people in the world takes place in Commonwealth countries as a result of the British Empire.’
On Feb. 5 the House of Commons overwhelmingly approved the equal marriage bill by a vote of 400 to 175. Expectations are that the bill will receive its final vote of approval from the Commons as early as this week, after which it will be sent to the House of Lords.
Update: Read The Commonwealth’s press release here. The Charter of the Commonwealth, which Queen Elizabeth will be signing, can be read here.
7 Comments
While I appreciate the Queen’s pending remarks, her choice of words show no courage at all.
Especially for the Commonwealth nations where the death penalty still stands, let alone being thrown in prison for being who you are.
If she really cared she would have chosen better words, not safe ones.
You are aware that QEII’s words are those agreed upon by the various governments involved. They are not personal.
The statement can only be seen as a plus.
What does it mean to be a Commonwealth nation exactly and how does it effect this policy?
As I understand it, the Commonwealth operates by consensus. Considering that among the counties involved are some of the most rabidly anti-gay in the world, it shouldn’t be surprising that “sexual orientation” isn’t spelled out. Given that, the fact that the anti-gay countries would even agree to the addition of “other grounds” should be a read as a positive step, is my guess. But, we’ll have to see what the people in the know have to say once the press gets busy with this question. In the mean time, I’m very encouraged by the positive comments from the leader of UK’s Stonewall organization (see above). It should be fair to assume that he understands the import of this.
I now see that Peter Tatchell feels much as I do.
“Media reports are wrong. The Queen has NOT expressed support for LGBT equality. The Commonwealth Charter that she’s signing includes no pledge on LGBT rights. LGBT rights were deliberately excluded. In 61 years as Queen, she has never publicly uttered the words lesbian or gay. She is a patron of hundreds of charities but none of them are gay ones. Not once has she visited or supported a gay charity. For the last four years, I’ve been pressing Buckingham Palace over the Queen’s failure to acknowledge the existence of LGBT people – and got nowhere.”
There are two questions that are getting muddled. The first is, does the new charter include gays in its statement against discrimination? The second is, has the queen ever acknowledged her LGBT subjects / been an LGBT supporter?
Tatchell agrees that the answer to the first question is ‘yes’: “By signing the new Commonwealth Charter, with its rejection of all discrimination, the Queen is implicitly endorsing gay human rights. Although the charter does not include an explicit commitment to gay equality, the clause rejecting discrimination based on ‘other grounds’ implicitly includes a rejection of homophobic discrimination.”
He’s taking the opportunity presented by the charter signing today to answer the second question with a resounding ‘no’. But the fact that the queen hasn’t served her LGBT subjects well doesn’t negate that fact that she will be signing the new charter tonight that provides a platform for commonwealth countries to pressure their anti-LGBT peers to clean up their act.
So in essence what we seem to have is a not-gay-friendly monarch doing her duty by signing a major pro-equality document. This is a positive step, even if you believe her to be personally homophobic, since she like Uganda et al are being pushed forward by the rest of the commonwealth.
I look forward to hearing her comments tonight at the signing ceremony.
Thanks — I think that is the most level-headed description of what’s going on there that I’ve seen. I was getting pretty confused on the import of this (which, to be blunt, is not usual for me — I’m usually better at winnowing out the chaff.)