This Italian version of this article is online at www.articolo29.it/genius, the English version at scholarship.law.duke.edu/djcil/vol24/iss1/4, the Dutch version at hdl.handle.net/1887/24920, and...Show moreThis Italian version of this article is online at www.articolo29.it/genius, the English version at scholarship.law.duke.edu/djcil/vol24/iss1/4, the Dutch version at hdl.handle.net/1887/24920, and the Vietnamese version at hdl.handle.net/1887/24934.The right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings was first articulated — as an aspect of the right to respect for private life — by the European Commission of Human Rights (in 1976). Since then such a right has been recognised in similar words by national and international courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court (Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees), the European Court of Human Rights (Niemietz v. Germany), the Constitutional Court of South Africa (National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality), and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Ortega v. Mexico). This lecture traces the origins of this right, linking it to the meaning of the word ‘orientation’ and to the basic psychological need for love, affection and belongingness (Maslow 1943). It proposes to speak of ‘the right to relate’, and argues that this right can be seen as the common theme in all issues of sexual orientation law (ranging from decriminalisation and anti-discrimination, to the recognition of refugees and of same-sex parenting). This right can be used as the common denominator in the comparative study of all those laws in the world that are anti-homosexual, or that are same-sex-friendly. The right to establish (same-sex) relationships implies both a right to come out, and a right to come together. The right to develop (same-sex) relationships is being made operational through legal respect, legal protection, legal recognition, legal formalization, and legal recognition of foreign formalization. Show less
This article is available online at http://opil.ouplaw.com. International protection for same-sex partnership is a topic that has seen important developments recently, reflecting more extensive... Show moreThis article is available online at http://opil.ouplaw.com. International protection for same-sex partnership is a topic that has seen important developments recently, reflecting more extensive national developments in a growing number of countries. These national and international developments are likely to continue and to reinforce each other. The current state of international law seems to be quite clear on two points: discrimination between unmarried different-sex cohabitants and unmarried same-sex cohabitants is prohibited, and exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage is (probably) still permissible. In between those two points the field is less clear. There is growing support for the proposition that a registered partnership or same-sex marriage validly contracted in one country should be recognized by international organizations and — for certain purposes — also by other countries. And there are reasons to expect that international bodies will apply the prohibition of indirect discrimination to situations where same-sex partners are being excluded from certain legal benefits, because these are only available to married partners. This indirect discrimination argument, which focuses on providing specific benefits, rather than on obtaining status, has been accepted already in several domestic courts. In the short run, persuading international human rights courts and bodies to apply it will probably be the most effective way of increasing the international protection of same-sex partnership. Several countries have, in response to claims that marriage should be opened up to same-sex couples, introduced a form of registered partnership. Assuming that international human rights law will not soon require all countries in the world to open up marriage to same-sex couples, and assuming that many legislatures will be reluctant to attach all rights and obligations of marriage to non-registered cohabitation, it seems possible that some day international human rights courts and bodies will start to require that countries should introduce some alternative to marriage. Any claims in this field deserve serious attention, because, as the European Court of Human Rights has consistently put it, the right to respect for private life encompasses ‘the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings’. Show less
