Okay, I think we're getting ready to start today. I want to welcome everybody. Thank you everyone for coming out on such a glorious post-holiday weekend. My name is Nancy Lindborg. I'm the president of US Institute of Peace. And I want to start off by thanking International IDEA for its partnership with this event. And I understand there are a number of embassy representatives and we welcome all of you here. But what an amazing day. I mean I was watching the news this weekend thinking I cannot believe they timed this event for this day. And even more importantly, we have with us one of the activists who was instrumental in Saturday's historic referendum. And when I read the president of Ireland's quote about today disclosing who we are as a generous, compassionate, bold and joyful people, I still am feeling kind of teary. And I can imagine that from Monique who's here in the front row, who had to tear herself away from celebrations in Ireland. Thank you for joining us and we are just overjoyed. So you'll hear from Monique later today, but the fact that she got herself on a plane after that historic vote and joined us here today is I think yet another affirmation of her commitment to these issues. So this is a critical core issue for our mission. USIP was founded 30 years ago as a nonpartisan, federally funded, independent organization with a very audacious mission and that is a world without violent conflict. And one of the things that we know very clearly is that you need to be inclusive and you need constitutions that are inclusive of all people. All people need to be at the table. This event is squarely a part of our mission and this weekend's event was clearly in the right direction and pointing a pathway forward for all of us. So we are delighted to have everyone here today, all of our panelists to highlight efforts to how to promote the inclusion of LGBTI voices in constitution-making processes and to learn from your experiences. I also noted it was a big weekend that a new Gallup poll shows that 60% of Americans now favor same-sex marriage. So hopefully we will take heart from what happened this weekend and move to history of our own in the coming weeks, albeit through a different legal mechanism. And I'm very pleased today to introduce the newly appointed U.S. Special Envoy for LGBT Affairs, Randy Berry. Special Envoy Berry is six weeks in the post, I think, has already extensively traveled and brings extraordinary energy and enthusiasm to this post. He's previously served as the U.S. Council General in Amsterdam in Auckland, New Zealand and is a nine-time Meritorious Honor Award recipient who's been a career member of the State Department of Posts throughout Asia. I know what a difference it makes to have somebody with Randy's energy and vision in this kind of a job and so I'm very proud to be able to introduce you and we're very delighted that you're in this post. Thank you for joining us and please join me in welcoming Special Envoy Berry. Great.  With six weeks under my belt now, I feel that I've got some solid achievements that we can point to already. As I joked at an event last week, most of them are logistical in nature and I now have a trash can in my office. I like to say that we're going to count successes wherever we can get them and I certainly count that as maybe not one of our major successes but one of our lesser ones. I am incredibly optimistic as I start down this path for the U.S. government and I wanted to share with you why I believe that is true. That when my life changed massively at the end of February when I came back for an appointment ceremony with Secretary Kerry. From that day onwards, my email inbox has grown in ways that I could only have previously imagined and I will tell you that of the thousands and I would say at this point tens of thousands of messages that I've gotten. Most of them from outside of government. Most of them from outside the United States. I can count the number of negative messages that I've received. If you look even at my Facebook page or LinkedIn because the total number of negative messages that I've received have been zero. Not a single one. What I have had are a huge number of positive authors of assistance from business, from community activists, from grandmothers, from people in every walk of life. And that tells me that I have a superb wind at my back. I'm although, you know, the position is certainly new across the street at the State Department. The work itself is not. So I'm thrilled to be joining the team of very dedicated folks over at the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor that are working this space. And we are busy, aren't we, Kristen? We were just about to I just returned from I heard the great news about Ireland while I was in finishing up a trip in Jamaica, where I think there are some interesting, positive things underway there as well. But we're just about to set off on a 15 country, five week travel that I'm already tired just talking about it. We are so excited at the State Department that USIP is expanding its excellent work to capture LGBTI initiatives and activities. And we look forward very much to working with you as we expand on our side as well in our engagement on these issues. One of my goals in this new role is to build a very broad set of partners and that includes with civil society organizations and think tanks. You provide the expertise that often guides our work on the ground. And we are grateful for meetings like today where we can take on a new issue, meet with new experts and find better ways to be good partners in these issues, which we all hold very, very dear. In the past 10 years, we have seen an increasing focus on human rights for LGBTI persons around the globe. And constitutional change has and constitutional change has provided a unique opportunity for groups to mobilize for their members' rights and their recognition. I think as you'll hear from our panelists today, some of whom, some who have experienced the drafting process firsthand, the Constitution of the country reflects the history of its people and its struggles. Constitutions and constitutional courts are powerful tools to protect rights of members of minority groups. Cultural norms, such as patriarchy, are so entrenched in many societies that majoritarian politics have historically had difficulty correcting imbalances and discriminatory practices on their own. So to overcome inequities, many countries are addressing the rights of members of the oppressed and marginalized populations through the context of their constitutional drafting processes. Many opportunities for constitutional reform occur during transitions we have seen. Transitional periods allow a country to redefine its identity in a way. And since many of these transitions occur after some form of conflict or denial of benefits of citizenship to one or more parties, the rhetoric of equality is often a central feature of discussions during the drafting. I have a colleague here who you're going to hear from from from South Africa. And that very much comes to my mind because I think in every one of those examples was it was it was certainly the case that we saw evolve when the South African Constitution was being drafted. LGBTI individuals, women and members of other marginalized group often bear the brunt of violence in times of conflict. And thus the role of these voices is vital in the reconciliation process. It not only ensures the legal protections are enacted, but it also can serve as a healing mechanism. And it certainly surely creates a more durable, healthier nation. Based on this, the legal position of all marginalized group, which includes LGBTI persons, women, people with disabilities, ethnic and religious minorities, these all lie at the heart of the debate about which values a Constitution should reflect when its drafters seek to develop a modern pluralistic legal system. You will hear from panelists today, I believe that in recent years, legal experts, judges and political leaders in post-conflict countries have struggled to draft constitutions that reflect domestic traditions in religion, which have historical and cultural importance. But also protect human rights and fundamental freedoms. Despite these challenges, several countries have indeed codified gender equality into their post-conflict constitutions. The provisions that countries have added to their constitutions have varied widely from general equality clauses to more specific clauses that afford particular rights and protections, such as the right to be protected against violence. I think we will also hear that it's difficult to judge the full impact, benefits and outcomes of reform efforts thus far. But the text of some new constitutions, and again I'll go back to the South African Constitution, again, lays a solid foundation for the equality that all persons deserve. And given the challenges that vulnerable populations face, it is worth our exploring every tool that we have in our box to create and sustain change. President Obama in 2011 issued a memorandum directing what the United States government should be doing on this important issue. And even before that memo, our Secretary of State at the time, Hillary Clinton, had prioritized vulnerable persons, including LGBTI persons, in the Department of State's foreign policy agenda. Many of you probably remember the historic speech that she delivered in Geneva on the human rights of LGBTI persons. It was a seminal work and it guides our engagement to this day. The presidential memorandum itself directs our work in five key areas, including one area that is very relevant to our discussions today, and that is combating criminalization of LGBTI status or conduct abroad. This is a subject of discussion as I embark on global travel. Some of the countries that we'll be traveling to, frankly, have been ahead of the United States in this process, some or not, but we're engaging across a very wide spectrum to discuss, to turn over issues, to discuss the issue of human rights in ways that are relevant to greater legal protections. I think it was quite interesting, as I mentioned, I've just returned from Jamaica, where on Sunday the oldest print newspaper and the one with the greatest circulation on the island published what is truly an extraordinary editorial calling for the repeal of what they call the buggery law in Jamaica. It's never been done before, and I think that is a remarkable development because, as we've seen, change sometimes comes quickly and sometimes it comes slowly, but I think we need to be focused on advancing the cause even with small steps where we can because same-sex conduct is still outlawed in nearly 80 countries globally and in a handful of those the penalty remains death. As part of our work to increase broader recognition of the human rights, we are working to support local, national and international efforts that aim to both repeal these negative laws that further undermine human rights as well as promote the passage of new laws that positively reinforce the message of equality. We recognize constitutional reform as a process to achieve both goals and look forward to working with USIP and others to identify reform processes where we and other friendly states can also be supportive. We recognize that the inclusion of LGBTI persons in constitutional reform illustrates on its own a country's commitment to making members of vulnerable groups an equal part of society. We also recognize that the inclusion of LGBTI persons provides an opening for persons to participate in the drafting and decision-making processes that takes place when building a new state. History has proven that LGBTI persons and women are often the best advocates for their own cause. As I say that, I'm recalling, I served for a couple of years in Kathmandu just after the end of the civil conflict there. And an openly gay member of parliament by the name of Shneel Pant was instrumental in making sure that greater legal protections and a discussion on issues affecting the LGBTI community in a place like post-conflict Nepal had a central place at the table, and I would encourage you to take a look at what has happened in a legal sense, in Nepal since then. That kind of leadership absolutely matters. We can also look to the significant role that prominent LGBTI advocates can also play, as was the case with constitutional court justice Ed Cameron, who played a very key role in the successful inclusion of LGBTI rights in the South African case. Constitutional reform can provide the basis for legal claims of discrimination that can be used as a tool to uproot customs and structures that are prejudicial. Part of our work through the Global Equality Fund we are supporting civil society in their efforts to encourage more inclusive judicial and legal sector reform. The fund is educating judges on human rights broadly to make sure they are aware of their own constitutions, including non-discrimination provisions which aim to protect all persons. We're also working to support networks of paralegals to support LGBT persons in need of legal redress. If, for example, they are evicted or they lose their job or need help to affirm their rights, all of these efforts aim to feed into broader national processes and that includes constitutional reform. Through the fund we've learned about the important role of judges and magistrates and recognize that our legal and constitutional reform initiatives need to be embedded within larger human rights education and awareness efforts, depending upon the local context. The legal trainings that the fund supports relate to broader topics, for example, access to justice for vulnerable persons or promoting equal access to health care for members of all marginalized categories. I understand the panelists have developed case studies based on the challenges and successes that they've faced and I look forward to reading those studies and using them to inform our own work. This kind of partnership is really critical. I believe that my role at the State Department will rise and fall on our ability to work across government, across foundations, across businesses and also with civil society organizations. Because I think the more voices that we have added to the chorus that diversity matters and that embracing diversity builds strength, whether you're coming from a business background, from a foundational one, from a government one. And I think from the U.S. perspective clearly we've got a story to talk about diversity. An honest discussion that is honest about the steps that it has taken us over many years, over many decades, and I'm not talking just about LGBTI rights, but in making sure that equal access under the law means equal access under the law for all. All of you know, as well as I do, that there's an extraordinary amount of work on our plate, that in working together and making sure we form these partnerships in a spirit of transparency and common cause, I am very, very optimistic that we will create the change that we need. So thank you again for including me this morning and I look forward to hearing the discussion evolve. Thank you. Join me up here, please. Good morning again, everyone. My name is Jason Gluck and I'm a senior program officer here at USIP. I sit in the rule of law section and I head up our constitution-making projects. I want to again thank our president, Nancy Lindberg and Special Envoy Barry for your remarks in particular. This partnership that you speak of between USIP and the State Department is critically important to us and it's one of the things that guides everything we do. And similarly, we know that in working around the world, constitution-making for USIP and I think for a lot of international actors, including the State Department, is really searching for that intersection between the constitutional moment and peace building. Using ways, every means possible to help our national counterparts in sometimes very difficult situations, post-conflict, transitional and divided societies to use the constitutional moment as an opportunity for political transformation, democratic consolidation and peace. And although we'd like to think we come at this with some experience and knowledge, we know that the best lessons learned, the best practices comes from the ground. It comes from those who have been there, who have actually been part of their own national processes, who have been part of their own political transformation and we do our best when we leverage that, which has come before us and we try and act as a conduit to bring these lessons learned to other places around the world that are experiencing who are walking these paths for the first time. Special Envoy, you mentioned the Nepali gentleman, Sunil, who we were actually on Skype with yesterday as we were putting together our case studies. He's a contributor to this project. The purpose behind what you see in front of you is our attempt, and again I want to acknowledge our partner, International Idea, for its leadership in this particular project, to bring together those who can demonstrate strategies and tactics and lessons learned and what worked and what didn't to put together an advocacy guide that we can then share with the people who come next. And so the fact that you met Sunil many, many years ago is just a demonstration in my mind that there are some amazingly bright stars out there and they can be seen from all directions and although Sunil couldn't be with us today, I have five other brightest stars who I'm really excited to have a conversation with and allow you into this conversation today. I want to introduce very briefly, I believe their bios are in the packets that you have, so I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this, but Sunil Basariya is the head of the Constitutional Building Program at International Idea and a long-standing partner to USIP, particularly in their area of Constitution making. Michael DeFell is a former law clerk for the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of South Africa and is currently pursuing a PhD at the University of Cambridge as a Gates Cambridge Scholar. Moninia Griffith is the Director of Marriage Equality. At least now I don't know for how much longer. You know, you might be the victim of your own success, but in Ireland where she's just completed a years-long struggle to bring marriage equality to Ireland. Richie Maitland is the co-founder and the Director of Grundation Grenada, a social action collective dedicated to raising awareness and doing legal and policy advocacy around human rights issues in the Caribbean. And then Michelle Reddy is Program Director for the Fiji Women's Rights Movement, and we're really excited to have them all here today to share their experiences. We're going to have a bit of a moderated discussion right now, and then we're going to open it up for questions and answers from you as well as anyone who might be out there in the Twittersphere who wants to tweet us questions at hashtag LGBT diplomacy, and we will try and feed that into the discussion as well. So without further ado, I really like to get off on a high note here. So as we all know, this weekend was a historical moment, not just for Ireland, but for all of us following these issues closely. Ireland became the first country to legalize same-sex marriage through national referendum. So again, congratulations to you. What's particularly amazing to me is that this happened in a country where homosexuality was still criminal in 1993, I mean, just over 20 years ago. And so I thought I would start things out by asking you, Moninha, what do you attribute to the sea change and what can you tell us a little bit how we got to this historic moment? So there's a number of issues, I suppose there's lots of issues, but what I'd highlight today are one is in relation to capacity. So after, as some of you may know, we took a case through the Irish courts, Catherine Zappone and Ann Louise Gilligan were the plaintiffs in the case, and although they were unsuccessful in their case to have their Canadian marriage recognized in Ireland, what they were able to do is put the issue firmly on the agenda. So for the first time ever, Irish people saw loving committed a same sex couple speaking about having been married and trying to get recognition for that. So they really started a movement in Ireland and we got together and applied from some funding and after that we were able to put together an organization called Marriage Equality and work as a single issue NGO focused solely on achieving marriage equality in Ireland. So I think it's to do with capacity, having professional paid staff on board whose sole focus is achieving that goal. So we were able to work with a wonderful voluntary board, have good governance, have a strategic plan, work on mapping out the power structure in Ireland so how we would achieve this change and go about this in a very strategic way. Working with the media, increasing visibility of LGBT people, making the case from marriage equality in the media, increasing visibility of same sex couples, of their children, of their extended family networks and why marriage mattered to Irish people in a very particular Irish way. Because of that then we saw an increase in public support rise from 56% in 2008 to 73% just earlier this year. We were also able to work capacity build with LGBT activists across the country with our Outier TD campaign. Our TD is an MP, an elected representative and we really taught how to lobby, taught ordinary individuals how to lobby, how to go in and talk to their elected representatives in their constituency clinics about why this issue mattered to them and therefore make the issue both personal for the elected representative and also politically motivate them that this was an issue that voters in their constituency were concerned with. So we increased capacity of people to engage with the political system and change hearts and minds and increase political support. We also did our own lobbying, so it was grassroots and grass tops lobbying going on. So we went in and spoke to our 166 MPs and our 60 senators about the issue and made it real for them, explained to them why it mattered to Irish people. And over the course of the eight years that we worked on it, therefore we saw an increase in political support and eventually complete support, cross-party support across the political spectrum. All the political parties adopted an official position supporting the introduction of civil marriage equality for same-sex couples. We also saw then a promise to hold a referendum come about because of that political support, because of that lobbying with the grassroots and the grass tops and then the constitutional convention process. We were able to work with partners and marriage equality got together with Glen the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network and ICCL, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. And together we worked to speak to the members of the constitutional convention about why this mattered and we brought in people to share their stories, young adult children who'd grown up with lesbian and gay parents, got to share their stories about why it was important. And at the end of that process then, when the issue was put to a vote, 79% of the members decided to recommend to government to insert a positive right for same-sex marriage in the Irish constitution. So voted by 81% to recommend to government to put forward legislation to provide for equality for children growing up with lesbian and gay parents. So it was a very interesting process. Also, because of this increased capacity, we were able to build a movement so we were able to work with our supporters face-to-face through the media and also build a social media movement so we worked very well getting the message out to supporters and building our base of support. And so all this work, I suppose, laid the foundation for a referendum campaign that took place over the last 88 days. So the capacity was there, the support was there, the movement had been built and we had identified champions, built coalitions, built a network of people that we could reach out to when we knew the referendum was being called. So we had civil society support and people all over Ireland ready, willing and informed and educated and able to engage with us in the referendum campaign. The other issue, I suppose, was the decline in the influence of the Roman Catholic Church or the hierarchy. I should say that the Catholic Church is still very important to very many Irish people and lots of people still identify as Catholic or elapsed Catholic. So their influence is still very strong but for many people of faith they make up their own minds now about issues of social justice, issues of civil law. So when it came to the referendum, many Catholics, because they make up their own minds on these issues, were able to vote yes for civil marriage equality because even though they were people of faith who were devout, for them this was a separate issue to do with equal citizenship and nothing to do with the sacrament of religious marriage. Also I suppose the increased visibility of gay and lesbian people and people, well-known people, so very senior politicians, people in the media coming out and sharing their stories, debunking some of the myths or the stereotypes people had about LGBT people and really I suppose increasing empathy amongst the general public for gay and lesbian people and the case for marriage equality. And lastly I suppose one thing that I'd like to draw attention to was the global movement towards marriage equality. That created a momentum. It also created awareness. It made the news, made media every time that the country introduced marriage equality. It added to the momentum and increased awareness about it and I suppose decreased people's fear or trepidation about what this meant and also we were able to then point at countries that had, you know, for a decade had had marriage equality and the sky hadn't fallen down so we were able to allay any fears or concerns that people would have about what would happen to Irish society, what would happen to Irish families to the introduction. And also on a very practical level then we had friends and allies who had achieved this and we could work with them and talk to them and share the learnings from their successes and their failures along the way so we had a great support across the world in a way. Thank you. Well I have to ask you then I mean with all those years and an incredibly uphill battle was there a particular moment where you thought, well, we may actually get this? Well I always believed we could because I knew that all we had to do is to tap into Irish people's sense of fairness and equality and you know that from visiting Ireland, Jason and also marriage is a very important issue important institution for Irish people so we knew if we could explain to Irish people that all this was about was sharing this freedom to people if you believe that marriage is a good thing for people for families, for society then why wouldn't you want to open it up? But there were particular moments I suppose that stand out. Our former president Mary McElise a couple of years ago came out in defence she just said, I'm just glad anyone wants to get married and she would be well known in Ireland she's a devout Catholic she's an expert in canon law she would be very much seen and respected by Catholic people and indeed my own father who'd been listening to me talk about marriage equality for many, many years it was after he heard Mary McElise speak about it and say that she was supportive of it that he and many people like him had a light bulb moment and went, yeah, actually this is something I could support I can... you know, this fits nicely with my own beliefs and my faith systems also things like in more recent times the young adult children with gay and lesbian parents speaking at the Constitutional Convention when they got up and spoke I was sitting on the panel like this and I was looking around at people's faces and I could see everybody's faces everybody was in awe, could hear a pin drop the temperature of the room changed then because people's fears, their concerns about if you let gay people get married the next thing they'll want to do is have children what will that mean, think about the children and here were two wonderful young adults explaining what their lives were like allaying those fears, addressing those fears and then people realised actually the kids are all right so it's okay that was another standout moment for me personally in the last few weeks we've been on a national bus tour on the Yaspus and we have been out having conversations with literally thousands of Irish people in over 80 towns and villages and those conversations for me I really knew we were going to win this after having those conversations because ordinary Irish people some who knew gay and lesbian people some who had children who were gay and lesbian or who had friends or other family members spoke very passionately about why this was so important but others who did not know gay and lesbian people but felt that this was about the kind of Ireland that we want for ourselves for future generations of Irish people that they were going to come out and vote yes and the reception we got was overwhelmingly positive so I felt very confident that we could do it but also in the last few months we've seen that the groups like Faith in Marriage Equality a group of people of faith coming out to advocate for this groups like that, groups like Belong to a national LGBT youth organization they got together a coalition of children's rights organizations and other groups working with young people and children to come together to put forward the case for why this matters for young Irish people so these were all really important moments when I just knew that we were on to a winner but I suppose for me the most poignant was on Thursday night the night before the referendum was seeing photographs all over Twitter of all the Irish people coming back all the diaspora coming back to vote in the referendum Dublin Airport was thronged the buses, the trains everything was absolutely packed and the hashtag Home to Vote and Be My Vote were trending and I knew we were on to a winner That's beautiful, thank you and we'll get back to you in a moment but I want to move for a second from our most recent victory to one of the earliest and Michael, South Africa the constitution making process itself has almost become a rallying cry a reference point for so much of the world in a number of respects I mean the process, the moment obviously was this pivotal ushering out of apartheid into democracy in South Africa but we look at your experience with a bit of reverence both the process because it was so open it was so participatory it was so inclusive we take a lot of those principles and we do try and impart them to countries where we work the constitution itself is so progressive the constitution, 1996 was the first one in the world to recognize sexual orientation as a protected class in its equality provision and what amazes me is that you have this success this unprecedented milestone reached in this incredibly participatory national dialogue of a constitution making process and yet it seems as though the strategy was part of the LGBTI or maybe it was G at that time the activists in trying to get this recognition in these rights was very much an elite one that it was gay activists working directly with constitutional drafters maybe largely outside the public eye and certainly outside many of these public forum I'm wondering if you could share with us the reasons behind the strategy of elite versus the grassroots advocacy that you just saw in Ireland and perhaps talk a little bit about the repercussions as you see it, you know, 20 years later from that strategy Yeah, thanks, Mason Yeah, I think you're correct South Africa provides a different model towards the protection of LGBTI individuals so I think perhaps just to give a bit of context the process that South Africa was going through at the fall of apartheid I think it provided an opportunity and I say the utmost respect within the LGBT community to use this process to advance the interests as well now of course South Africa unfortunately still to this day has severe negative attitudes towards the LGBTI community so a grassroots social based movement as we saw in Ireland was never going to be an option and so having that in mind I think very prominent leaders and academics within the LGBTI community took it upon themselves to coordinate a very strategic and focused campaign that would ensure if we were a little bit more progressive than you give us credit for to ensure that in 1993 during the interim constitution that sexual orientation would be a protected ground in the equality clause and that happened and we became the first country in the world to do so and the constitution continued into the 1996 final constitution how did they do it well of course it was a very open process and I guess all the main political actors knew what was going on but in some sense the strategy relied on being a little bit quiet so for instance another good contrast to the Irish example is ideas of marriage and adoption were swept under the rug so they were focusing on ideas of decriminalising same sex marriage and I think that was kind of what the narrative that they were forwarding to the drafters and negotiators of the constitution I guess what we should also keep in mind is what worked in favour of the inclusion of this provision on sexual orientation discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation that South Africa was coming out of an era where we saw mass oppression and discrimination predominantly on the basis of gender and race and I think this created a doorway or opened a doorway to advance the argument that the type of oppression and discrimination that LGBTI persons faced during the apartheid regime was in many ways very similar to what had happened on the grounds of race and gender and so I think that narrative helped advance the cause that being said we may classify it as an elitist approach but I think broadly speaking the LGBTI community did support what was happening and I think this was evidenced by the fact that during the drafting of the 1996 final constitution when and as you say it was a very open process and any person could actually write submissions to the committee surprisingly they received more petitions in support of including this provision against discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and what they received against it what I also want to say is that after the adoption of the final constitution this very elitist strategic pathway was continued so the main national coalition at the time once again devised of a strategy that would seek to incrementally challenge the existing laws so they would start with the most egregious violations and try to progressively test the waters and try to progressively move up to the recognition of same-sex marriage and I guess that resonates within the US context as well in 1998 they brought the matter they brought the criminalization of same-sex before the court and the courts invalidated that law over the next couple of years additional challenges were brought which were aimed at ensuring that same-sex partnerships received many of the same legal benefits or entitlements that married couples get and that all accumulated in 1995 sorry 2005 when marriage equality was brought before the courts the constitutional court which contained members that I think were very sympathetic to the gay and rights movement held that the law as it stood was unconstitutional and they referred it back to the legislature for remedy a year later South Africa became the fifth country in the world and first in Africa to recognize same-sex marriage I suppose when we compare it to a grass-based or social-based movement I think there's advantages and disadvantages to both approaches reflecting on the South African experience the major advantage was in terms of securing legal protection it worked within a space of 10 years we went from recognizing same 12, 13 years we went from recognizing sexual orientation as a protected ground constitution to recognizing same-sex marriage however is a drawback and I think whenever we think about legal change, social legal change or sorry bringing about social change through legal mechanisms I think we need to keep something at the back of our mind is that because it was never a grass-based movement because it was never a social-based movement still to this day South Africa doesn't have a major civil society organization that keeps the pressure on our government to ensure that LGBTI interests are constantly protected and I think at times we feel the ramifications of that in today's society so we still severe homo prejudice within society and and that sometimes takes the form of lesbians being subjected to what we call corrective rape where they we then try to remove their sexual debuances sometimes that results in murder and of course LGBTI persons are still faced to subject to severe ridicule and harassment within society so legal change obviously doesn't actually or tends not to also affect social change so there is a disadvantage that I think South African experience speaks to and something that I think any other country that wants to embark on this process also has to consider. Thank you but correct me if I'm wrong it wasn't a decision we prefer in a lead approach to grass roots it was the recognition that a grass roots effort at that time was not going to be unlikely to be successful I think in hindsight we can see this we look back at these things and think there was a concerted strategy and I think there was that recognition but it was people responding to the process and saw that this was the best opportunity for a couple of people to come forward to be engaged with the new political elite to ensure that LGBTI persons get protection in the future. Thanks Michael. Michelle, Fiji has a very interesting history regarding recognition of sexual minorities each of Fiji's three constitutions since 1990 have included some recognition in inequality provision and they've become increasingly more inclusive and progressive in each iteration I was wondering if you could discuss a little bit about Fiji's experience the evolution of this language what you think it tells us about LGBT rights in Fiji and particularly regarding constitution making Fiji has a colorful history as I'm sure all of your countries have as well apart I wanted to talk a little bit about the process itself in terms of each of those constitutions well technically we've had three we have three constitutions and one constitution that was not accepted by the interim administration at that time so four constitutions I wanted to really highlight that in terms of constitution making process it's really important that the process itself is participatory and that it has the political will of the people otherwise as we've heard it can be difficult along the way in terms of the language there has been progressive language used in Fiji's constitution in 1990 we have broad definitions or rights to equality and non-discrimination in the 1990 constitution we actually have the word sex used in it and then in 1997, seven years on we've actually used the words gender and sexual orientation to the Yashkai constitution or also known as the people's constitution quite broad definition which is reflected in the constitution that was passed by government in the 2013 one and in this particular constitution we have a broader definition very progressive uses the word gender, sex also uses gender orientation gender identity and expression so in terms of the language it's been really great but there's also challenges within the 2013 constitution so whilst you might have a really progressive language you also need to look at the progressive language in terms of other sections of the constitution so for example the 2013 constitution whilst it gives this really great language it also limits it specifically to non-discrimination and not positive realisation of universal human rights particularly it prevents there's an exception in the bill of rights portion of the 2013 constitution that talks about limiting this rights in cases of marriage so a long way to go for Fiji in terms of the island case study so there are three exceptions in terms of marriage adoption and also inheritance so there are exceptions and limitations within this constitution the other really challenging part of the 2013 constitution is for the first time ever and we've taken some of the lessons from the South African constitution it has broadened the bill of rights so we've got some rights that we never had in the previous constitution for example there are explicit rights in relation to social and economic rights but there's also a caveat in the bill of rights because you can limit those rights and the language that's used in the constitution talks about you know there's a section that says that the state can make limitations expressly prescribed or authorised or permitted whether by or under a written law in the previous constitutions there was a language that said of course you can limit certain rights but the limitations and the language that was used in the last few constitutions it must be reasonable in a free and democratic society we don't have that language in the current constitution and form experience and international standards this is a concern for LGTBI groups my last challenge that I wanted to talk about is whilst you have really great progressive language in a constitution it doesn't necessarily mean that it trickles down to full realisation that lives automatically change you've got to talk about political will of the state in putting across resources you've also got to look at the culture of those different structures whether they do believe in LGTBI rights one of the things that the LGTBI groups in Fiji had put forward in their submission was the reinstatement of the Fiji Human Rights which is now known as the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission that must be compliant with Paris principles the state has said that they would and have actually appointed commissioners which is a great start the problem is in the current constitution there's also another section which actually limits the kinds of cases and matters that the Human Rights Commission can look at so for instance there's a specific section that talks about the matters that the Human Rights Commission cannot look into and so any matters prior to 21st of August 2013 the Human Rights Commission cannot actually investigate and a lot of anecdotal evidence from members of the LGTBI groups in Fiji show that a lot of human rights violations are actually undertaken by state members or partners so again great progressive language within that this current constitution that could really be detrimental to the full realization of LGTBI rights Thanks Michelle Richie, so Grenada is currently in the midst of constitutional reform and I know you've been on the front lines and had some interesting experiences that I'd like you to share with our audience here today but what's noteworthy is that at least as of now we have draft amendments that are being tabled before the parliament that are likely to go to referendum those amendments do not include any recognition of sexual orientation in the equality provision they do not include any explicit right for LGTBI citizens and yet you sit here before us do you consider your efforts a failure to characterize what's happening in Grenada right now in terms of LGTBI advocacy I would not categorize it as a failure at all as you refer, as you reference the Grenada constitution actually requires besides parliamentary special majority a referendum for amendments to take place there was a poll study done in 2014 that was released in November 2014 that was sponsored by UN AIDS that looked at among other things the kind of state of homophobia in Grenada what emerged from that from that study was some statistics that weren't necessarily shocking but were bad so about 38% of respondents indicated that they had strong homophobia among them to hate, that they hated LGTBI people just about 54% said that they had time or hung out with a homosexual person and about 59% of respondents closest 60% indicated that they did not believe that LGTBI people should have equality so we kind of knew going into this advocacy around constitutional reform that it would not have been successful what our push was was to sort of make it public conversation because prior to our engagement with the constitutional really being a public issue it has never formed part of the national political discourse we've tried to engage governments in the past we've sent papers to the attorney general's office and they've been completely ignored actually I met the person who was the attorney general we had a matter together sometime after submitting the paper and I introduced myself to him and I indicated here I'm the person who sent you that paper he laughed and he said ah well we have a special place where those go again so what our engagement with this issue around constitutional reform did was really make it a public conversation no there's a commission that was established by the government for the purpose of determining and making proposals around constitutional reform they accept written submissions so we in fact did a very detailed written submission to them and they invited us to present before the nation essentially before hundreds of people at the national trade center and at an event that was also being live cast I think that in their minds they thought that we would have simply back down from the issue because we would not have wanted to expose ourselves to the risk that advocates face necessarily but we actively took up the challenge and we went and addressed the nation it was extremely contentious but what happened was that there was a lot of news coverage there were a lot of robust debates happening on virtual media and in actual media and on the streets around these issues and there were a lot of conversations where we actually where homophobia actually was able to sort of be unpacked and I really believe that it is within this conversational space that we are able to unpack homophobia that we are able to see the misconceptions for what they are that you know actually know you know gaming or not pedophiles that actually know LGBTI people have existed across space time and history including within the Caribbean context and really to unpack and disaggregate a lot of the misconceptions that underpin and inform homophobia and we believe that that national discussion has really been instrumental in shifting and starting to shift attitudes so while it might be perceived as a failure in some regard we see it as a success and we kind of knew going into it that this would have been the success coming out of it it's incremental isn't it yes yes definitely I mean you're it's a long war not a not a quick fight right well if anyone wants to go to Richie's website Groundation Yes it's GroundationGrenier.com there's a video of this presentation that he and a colleague gave at this public forum last year where the two of them are resoundly attempted to be booed off the stage when they introduced themselves in the issue that they're there to speak about they persevere and they really do change hearts and minds there in the public forum so I also don't think it's a failure we're always hoping to achieve more but it's amazing the progress that's being made certainly because we went from being booed in the beginning to actually being applauded by some members of the congregation in the end of the audience so thank you I want to turn to Summit Summit is well as an American I'm unlikely to ever have the opportunity to actually be a constitution maker for my country at least and so I'm always envious of people who even if they're experiencing difficult times in their countries have this seminal moment they can be a founding father founding mother Summit as a UK national I don't know what's going to happen what opportunities might be presented but despite that we have dedicated our careers to studying constitution making to trying to bring lessons learned and to assist others who are going through it and so I'm wondering from where you sit maybe why is constitutional recognition so important or is it are there alternative paths towards the role of LGBTI rights other than through constitutions and constitution making yeah thanks well whatever happens I don't think we'll end up with a written constitution in the UK so that's pretty sure but thanks very much for having us here first of all and thanks to USIP for all your support on this project it's been a real pleasure to work with Jason and his colleagues yeah so is constitutional recognition so important well a couple of things so one let's think about what it is that we're doing when we put things in a constitution right so in the UK we have parliamentary sovereignty and we don't really have we have the European Human Rights Act now but we don't really have a bill of rights like you have in America what we're doing when we put those things in a bill of rights or in a constitution is we're saying that these are more important than transient majority's desires right these are to be protected even if 99% of the population vote against this you can't take away my right to freedom of speech or freedom of religion and so one thing I would say with regards to LGBTI rights and similar marginalized minority rights if those constitutional rights are not there to protect the most vulnerable in society then who are they there for they're certainly not going to do much work if they're there just to protect the strong who will have the majority on their side so I think that's one thing that's important to recognize and secondly there's this political constitution and this nation building aspect of the constitution that we see in a lot of cases in South Africa perhaps being an archetypal example of that so during the constitution building process and when Richie's going to these public consultations or when we hear the presidents of Ireland's words that your president USAP read out before what's happening is also people the constitution is defining the political community for this country right it's really defining what does it mean to be a South African what does it mean to say that with South Africa what values does this exhibit so we believe that that should be a really inclusive process as much as possible that everyone should have their voice in defining these national values in South Africa it was called the birth certificate of the nation or the soul of the nation by Hassan Ibrahim nice turn of phrase so the process needs to be as inclusive as possible and it's this moment of higher lawmaking so it generally should be more inclusive more consensus space than ordinary in lawmaking and so I think those two reasons really do argue for seeking to include the vulnerable and most disempowered members of society and as Richie said to us yesterday he said you know if there's one thing the international community can do it's just get us to the table because without the international community we're not even at the table and I think that was a really important point about why constitution making as a participatory inclusive process is so important yeah and the last thing I would say is so you said there are other mechanisms there certainly are and in America you're not rewriting your constitution you're seeking judicial clarification and interpretation of how the current constitution might apply to same-sex marriage and so those are other ways of doing that and in South Africa too they didn't put same-sex marriage in their constitution and Michael explained this to us yesterday that they said we're just going to say that this is not a grounds for discrimination and then it will be open to society the legislature and the judiciary to discuss together what that means for South Africa and Cassanstein calls that incompletely theorized arguments and I think that's an important way too to look at a constitution that it should express values that everyone can agree on and everyone can agree on equality and non-discrimination based on who you are and then and you know this is a way to look at what's happening in Granada right you don't want to rule out any sector of society because you want everyone to see that they have a future with regards to LGBTI issues one sees that there are a lot of countries Kenya, the participant couldn't be with us here today in some Eastern European countries where they are excluding at the constitutional stage same-sex marriage or LGBTI rights and recognition at the constitution so I think that's a worrying aspect but in general I would say that we have to understand that constitutions are doing a different thing than law they're doing something political they're doing something that's based on national identity and that's very important therefore to be inclusive thanks so if I could open this up to all of our panelists we're all very interested in your personal journeys or experiences in terms of championing these issues maybe you talk about some of the risks that you face either as individuals or as organizations and networks along the way do you stand out in anyone's mind maybe something that you could anticipate others coming after you and other places might encounter themselves two come to mind one is a risk in relation to the coalition building and working together so in the Irish context marriage equality as on the tin we were working towards opening up civil marriage to same sex couples there was another organization a large national LGBT organization that was working towards civil partnership so there was a potential there for things to get quite nasty but instead we work together there were friendships there personal relationships there members of our board were on their board so it was important to try to try and hold things together and in fact then when it came to the Constitutional Convention we worked together on that and we realized that despite our very different ways of working and protect perhaps our different political small with a small p approaches that it was important for us to work together and to come together if we were going to achieve our ultimate goal sometimes it is about having to work together even if that prospect doesn't seem immediately what you want to do so that was one thing to unite the LGBT community we had to come together we had to present a united front and we had to present that to the Irish public and we had to present it to the media and to the political classes as well the second one was in relation to advocates like myself coming out and sharing our personal stories and at the beginning 8 years ago when we started doing that there weren't many people who were keen to do that keen to go into national or their local media and open up their personal stories their personal histories I have to mention Catherine Spone and Louise Gilligan again who were so brave to take that case and put themselves out there because at the time the first ones I remember were doing it and that can come at a huge personal cost you're obviously outing yourself there's no going back into the closet once you're in the media everybody knows about it so that can be very scary and we found that then in the last few months campaigning we were asking ordinary individuals to go out on canvas to knock on doors to go to shopping centres and ask people to vote yes and the most persuasive way we found was them talking about why they were going to vote yes instead of saying these are the facts these are the reasons it's about equality it was I'm voting yes because I have a lesbian sister I'm voting yes because I'm a mum I have two kids I want them to grow up in a world that treats all our in a country that treats all our sisters equally so that was a risky strategy but when we knew it paid off so what we had to do then I suppose is look at ways of minimising that risk or putting supports in place and what we did with our canvassers is we provided training we provided daily updates in relation to social media we provided other resources counselling workshops tips from psychologists and for experienced canvassers in relation to minding yourself we also asked people to go out in twos to have a buddy to check back in with people afterwards all these very practical ways of minding yourselves also the people that we asked to go out and do media we never just sent them out to do any media so we made sure that when they were speaking to media that journalist our researcher was well briefed well informed that they wouldn't put them up against somebody that would expose them to terrible hatred or having to defend their own personal lives against somebody who was going to come at it from a very theological point of view or an academic point of view and we gave them media training words in their mouth but how to handle the media and how to know when they were asked a question that they didn't want to answer how to stop that so it was really important for us the risks so we had to mind ourselves mind our advocates and mind our canvassers and we learnt that as we went I would say similar to Maninia as activists in the Caribbean region we face risks around developing a common politics and the way that discordant politics can really damage a movement we also face the risk, particularly now being engaged in some impact litigation and we actually have some really interesting legal cases now in the Caribbean before national courts as well as the Caribbean Court of Justice around LGBTI rights but taking cases without necessarily doing the analysis to determine whether it's best to do so because of course one negative precedent operates as a precedent for many years to come binding and persuasive so that's certainly a risk that we really have to think about and address the other risk is really personal and organisational because in the Caribbean whether you are LGBTI or perceived to be LGBTI there is this hostility that you get from the public that I've certainly been exposed to that my organisation has certainly been exposed to and as I indicated it's not only personal but it's also organisational in the sense of potential government sponsors saying don't give any funds to this particular organisation or that kind of thing my thing though in addressing those issues is you just kind of have to do it you know when we were on the Skype call with Sunil yesterday he said something that really spoke to my heart you know he said the more fearful you are the more powerful they become and so I just I think it's just important as activists in the region to just do the work but of course it's for everybody to determine where and how they advocate and where they draw the line in relation to advocacy and personal safety or exposure to risk I just also wanted to add to the conversation about coalition building because it can become really draining and tiring but it's even more important because there's several actors in a different context and you're not you know it's almost like building movements within movements and it does take a lot of time the risk of not you know paying attention to it is that you lose out on support that other groups can provide but you also lose out on experiences of other LGTBI groups who perhaps work in different fields than another LGTBI group so in terms of coalition building and relationship I think it's always important that when managing risk or looking at risk that you're also looking at the external risk that you might face as an individual organization or as a big movement but also the internal risk and we had this conversation yesterday about you know how often do we actually take the time to look after ourselves it's a really really hard place to work and it's tiring you know how often do we switch off how often do we turn off our phones and decide well today it's going to be a me day you know I'm not going to reply to emails I'm not going to look at Facebook or Twitter or any of that thing I'm just going to really focus on myself on my loved ones on the people that really you know for me are important at this moment and that's one of the things that I think we tend as activists and advocates to forget most of the time because we tend to focus on the external and not focus also on how important it is to sustain ourselves and other people along the way so that we can go further you know more effectively Thanks Michelle let's stay on this issue of coalition building for a moment then because it seems like the ability to mobilize both within the community and then certainly outside it is central to effective advocacy and successful outcome I'm wondering if any of the panelists could discuss a little bit about the strategies the tactics the challenges that you encountered when you were dealing with both allies and adversaries and trying to build coalitions Anyone So I suppose with the allies it was really important for us as a what was seen by the majority as a minority rights issue you know we knew we couldn't do this by ourselves so we have spent a lot of time over the last year eight years building this coalition throughout civil society in Ireland with NGOs working on human rights inequality trade unions employers, women's groups men's groups, groups working on children's rights and it does take a lot of energy and it's not coalition building for the sake of coalition building and so it takes a lot of time a lot of effort, a lot of personal relationships building on those and finding the commonality which means sometimes that you have to help out them as well so it does add to your workload but it's for us anyway it was crucial and it was one of the major reasons that the movement was so successful so that was our approach and with a very small staff team that was difficult but it was absolutely necessary and in the end what came out of that was the relationship between the three lead organizations and the referendum and then a whole a very long list of partner organizations that mobilized their own members their own lists their own supporters so that the movement at the end of the day the yes equality referendum movement was representative of pretty much every person, every type of person living on the island of Ireland and so we had champions and advocates speaking out and explaining to people who looked like them why it was important for them to go and vote yes so it was very worthwhile sorry were there moments where your coalition was tested oh yes sometimes in a small country like Ireland one of the big issues around funding and we set up in 2008 right before everything took a big nose dive so funding in relation to civil society work for NGOs our government didn't have any money so we were all we didn't get any money from the government but for many of our partners their capacity was significantly reduced for this kind of coalition work so that was extraordinarily difficult and challenging for them our own funding in Ireland there were two major foundations that were funding a lot of the work that was going on in relation to social justice both of them racked up over the last couple of years so that was hugely difficult for us to continue the work for our partners and our coalition partners and our allies to continue the work and then you were also competing with each other for funding for a limited part of funding so that was really stressful and really difficult and sometimes then in the political sphere there were times when you just had to be mindful of other people's political objectives and goals and then when I look at the people on the no side I mean we just very much took the approach not to be negative about them so the no side got very dirty used lots of red herrings you know there was and they outspent us I'd say by four to one what they continuously went on about how much money we were getting how we were well funded how we think, how it was this, that and the other and we just decided not to engage with any of that not to retaliate we just kept focused on what our goals were what our messages were and then we relied on independent bodies of lawyers of legal representatives to come out and to address some of those red herrings we did so ourselves and then in the independent referendum commission to address some of those so we just kept kept our eye on the goal and the prize and we didn't really get into a slagging match if you like with them and we didn't call out the the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church we decided not to go there we knew it would alienate people who wanted to support us and we just kept things positive and focused on what we were trying to achieve thanks I would say as well that in the Caribbean at least you know people see arguments as having less merit when they perceive them to be self interested so you know LGBTI people arguing for LGBTI rights that kind of attitude and where we have been able to achieve some changes where really we have been able to build a coalition which allows other movements for instance in St. Lucia in 2012 they amended their employment act to extend legislative protections from discrimination to LGBTI people and that was very much also because the activists in St Lucia would have engaged employment related organizations both locally and abroad for parliamentarians to really see that this is kind of an employment related issue as well you know it's not just about LGBTI discrimination and their self interest but this affects people in their work and workplace discrimination is one of the most significant forms of discrimination at LGBTI people in the Caribbean face so you know allying to use that word with people has been quite is quite crucial to the LGBTI movement in the Caribbean as for adversaries I would say that it's important as well to really engage and I'll see why in the Caribbean the biggest adversaries I would see to LGBTI issues have been the church historically they've been very much oppositional they've been very much hostile but the thing is Christianity and the church in the Caribbean historically has been very significant it's very interwoven into our culture so in Grenada for instance it's about 90% Christian and in the same UN AIDS poll study that I referred to earlier just about 64% of respondents indicated that it was religious views that informed their homophobia and I don't think that that would shift anytime soon so the what we've been trying to do was really engage churches and church leaders to sort of change the rhetoric for people to sort of understand my religious view but because my religion says a particular thing it doesn't mean that I should advocate for denying people their rights or that sort of thing so much the same sort of strategy that LGBTI activists in South Africa would have employed in engaging for instance Archbishop Desmond Tutu and that sort of thing that's quite important I'd also like to flag that it's important how we engage allies and how allies are represented so for instance in the Caribbean there's this idea that LGBTI advocacy is this depraved foreign phenomenon that has been imposed by weaker countries by more powerful countries and you all might be aware for instance of the impact Obama's statements had where I believe it might have been around two years ago there were statements by the US indicating that they would withdraw aid from Uganda if certain things weren't done and activists in Africa responded by saying overwhelmingly that it certainly wasn't helpful it helped to sort of reinforce this idea that this was something that was being imposed from abroad and so we have to be very careful how we engage particularly international allies and I think that for us in the Caribbean the ways that we wish to be supported and the ways that we think support can be meaningful is for international allies to provide us the technical assistance to build capacity to do the kind of work that we need to do and to leverage their positions of power to bring us to the table with governments where we otherwise might not be able to do so so for instance when we had engaged with the constitutional reform process last year our government had gotten some assistance from international agencies had gotten funding to do the town hall style meetings and to do the PR work and they had gotten some funding from the UN and they were actually visiting the UN delegation that Jason was a part of and that's actually how I met Jason and what that delegation had indicated to the commission was we want to hear from some minority voices so they were able to leverage a meeting between LGBTI activists in Grenada and the constitutional commission so we think those kinds of engagements are quite important but not engagements where this sort of international pressure is applied particularly bilaterally or so by government saying you need to do this or else we don't think that those sort of engagements are helpful at all Could I also just add I think when it comes to working with allies and adversaries it's one of the things that's worked quite well is looking at it as being an inclusive space and making sure that it's an inclusive space and we have two really great mantras that we have back at work that I'm sure you've heard of that the personal is political and nothing about us without us so you can't talk about LGBTI rights if you don't have the groups in the room and that you talk on their behalf I mean it's great if they do that you consult with them but I think nothing about us without us is a really good mantra to have because you need to ensure that it's an inclusive space and sometimes spaces can be hard to get and Richie has talked about how international actors can actually be helpful in providing a space at the table but there's also the other tactic of actually really claiming space for yourself so if you have an ally you can always get a women's rights group or children's rights groups to say hey there's another great group that you should have at the meeting please ensure that you invite them so you're claiming those spaces and ensuring that there are voices diverse voices at those spaces there's also the other tactic of actually creating new spaces so if you're not invited to these spaces you can actually create your own space and make it as inclusive as possible and there's two great examples back in Fiji where we've created spaces forums actually they're called the Fiji Women's Forum and the Fiji Young Women's Forum and for the first time ever we've had diverse women including LGTBI groups in those spaces it's quite vibrant and exciting for us because it's the first time few times over the last few years we've actually created our own space and claimed that space and hung on to those spaces and ensured that there is inclusive voices in those spaces Thanks Michelle I want to open up the question and discussion to you who have come and joined us today there are two microphones on either end of the room if you wanted to approach either one of them please introduce yourself you can ask a question to the entire panel or to a specific member of the panel and if there's anything happening in the Twitter sphere from all of the people around the world watching this on live stream please let me know that as well yeah, go ahead Hi, my name is I think so my name is Michael Karagis I'm from Belgrade, Serbia former State Secretary for Human Rights I have done a lot of things with regard to LGBT issues and that was one of the reasons I had to leave my country now I'm a consultant with UNDP on LGBT rights and policy I want to thank you for all those inspiring stories I've learned a lot but specifically about the Irish case I want to congratulate you but I don't feel as if that's a case for congratulating because it's in a way also sad that we have to wait from a majority to allow us to use our human rights do you really believe that this is a good example that we have to follow or now we have a lot of work ahead of us to explain that that's not a good way to go ahead that is actually a dangerous president that later on some undemocratic states or a popular opinion as it is in Ireland may use as a democratic way to exclude the minority LGBT people thank you well the first thing I'd say it wasn't our first choice we wanted to achieve this through the courts and we were unsuccessful and so we were building the movement really to achieve this through our parliament but there was no political will to do that the Attorney General had given his opinion that it would require a referendum to amend the constitution to allow for marriage for same sex couples so in some way it was taken out of our hands the choice of the route and yes at the time very many of us were very disappointed that minority rights could be were dependent on a majority of people voting on it and so a lot of us were heartbroken about that but they were the cards we were dealt so we had to pick ourselves up above the floor and deal with that and continue the movement building and the momentum building and I have to say there were days that I was standing I told this story last night I'll try not to get upset again there were days when I was out on canvases asking people to vote yes when when I spoke to a woman she was 58 and she said and a paraphrase because she used quite colourful language she said I can't believe I'm out here on 58 years old and I have to ask people for the permission to get married to the person that I love it's so humiliating so it took its toll it had huge personal toll for very many people so I would say it shouldn't be for me personally it's a risky route and if there are easier ways to do it I think there are ways to do it however winning this way was extraordinary you know I live in Dublin most of the time I'm happy about people recognizing me for the work that I do you know from seeing me in media or whatever but I would still be sometimes uncomfortable about holding my partner's hand in public and that I'd still be a bit fearful about that kind of thing but when she was dropping me to the airport to come out here on Sunday morning sorry getting upset and we held hands and I felt for the first time I could hold her hand in public and not be afraid because the majority of Irish people came out and voted yes I felt like an equal citizen because the majority of Irish people had said yes you are equal and yes we stand up for you and we'll come out in a landslide in numbers that were unprecedented no other referendum has seen this kind of number of Irish people come out to vote so in terms of affirmation and vindication it was the most powerful expression that I can imagine and that was wonderful but it was a scary road thank you thank you is there a question? I'm Laura Ballad I work at the State Department first of all I have to say being a volunteer activist for a few years trying to bring about the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell through grassroots action I completely hear everything you were saying fundraising and competition so I think doing a grassroots campaign like that has tremendous value and yes it's great when we can bring that out through court action but I also think that the kind of person to person contact you have through canvassing has its own value to that end I wanted to ask the whole panel just for your thoughts on how the internet has affected the LGBTI community and LGBT activism I think I know the answer for Ireland because I've been watching YouTube videos of LGBTI Irish people calling their nanas for several weeks now but I wonder if in some of the other countries we run into the same sorts of divides between rural and urban or between higher and lower socioeconomic status that might be limiting its potential so all the panels but I think in some of the places where we think grassroots activism faces even greater challenges than Ireland thank you so I'd say for my own context that the internet has been very positive so there is this kind of urban rural divide but in Grenada there's about 43% internet penetration so a lot of people particularly young people have access to the internet and the Caribbean is not like other contexts where we can have pride parades and walk around with rainbow flags and that sort of thing that can be quite dangerous in certain contexts so what the internet has done is allowed us a virtual platform to do advocacy and that has been quite useful actually in my own organization we do the majority of our advocacy virtually and I was commenting to Sumita believe last night that the internet has really revolutionized the way we share and consume information and it's certainly been helpful in our advocacy particularly in a context where doing underground work can be dangerous or at least certainly difficult anyone else want to jump in? okay getting affirmation from different panelists to the same answer hi I'm Megan Anderson I'm a state DRL and I manage our programming in Africa so this is a question from Michael South Africa South Africa as an example for the continent especially as an example for static for not seeing it what is it going to take for South Africa to grow here and recognize its constitution and the example it has set and make this less about being an anti-Western movement and more about being a pro-African movement an African owned LGBT movement I wish I had an answer so I mean for those of you who don't know my country hasn't had the best record in terms of international relations when it comes to the promotion of LGBTI rights in the world and particularly on the African continent a couple of years back I think the high water mark was when we sponsored a bill in front of the sorry a draft resolution in front of the UN Human Rights Commission I think that was the first time the Human Rights Commission recognized the need to protect sexual orientation apart from that we our department refused our international affairs department refused to speak out when certain things were happening in Uganda I've made the argument before that our constitution come from a legal perspective but our constitution does place an obligation on our state to ensure that their foreign policy is infused with human rights values including LGBTI rights and I think at the dawn of our constitutional democracy I think that was the sentiment within a government and a former president Nelson Mandela spoke about that need has dissipated somewhat and the excuse they give is pragmatic reasons I don't know unfortunately Hi, my name is Medushi and hopefully one day I will feel like you guys and be an activist so my question has kind of two parts the first one is kind of regarding Rajee's point on the conception of LGBTI rights as a foreign imposition and I was kind of just wondering if the rest of the panel could kind of expand on that especially because in many other parts of the world like in the Middle East or in my home country of India LGBTI issues are perceived as like an Islamic, an Indian and kind of that's a big barrier and then the second part of my question was regarding the issue of prioritization one argument that I've heard from like family members is that while LGBTI issues are important and like it's important to promote their rights it shouldn't be a priority because there's so many other issues that are a priority like the broader issue of poverty or like for example in India of rape and so kind of LGBTI issues should take a step back so I was just wondering how the rest of the panelists kind of take on that issue when confronted with the idea that it's important but they should wait a little bit Thank you Can I start? Before I answer your question I just quickly want to maybe go back to the previous ones and I think it just goes down to the fact that we don't have I think the room there for change is through civil society organizations if we can get it up to ensure that there's pressure on government and as I said previously that isn't the case in terms of this idea that gay rights is anti-Asian or anti-Islamic or anti-African I think what I think has proved somewhat successful in a South African context is where we've started to show that before the UK and the rest of Europe colonized Africa is that many African tribes were actually practicing different versions of what we would broadly classify as gay and lesbian relationships and I think it's just highlighting that issue that it didn't come from the West and in many ways that narrative has been taken away because I think there's many people who have now shown that the current persecution and stigmatization that we see in Africa is actually as a result of colonization that it was Western laws that came to Africa so that the narrative has started to change. In terms of a strategy to count to the argument that it's not the time for LGBTI persons to be seeking recognition well to relate to the South African experience we were at a point where there was a need to recognize principles of equality and non-discrimination and if that is what be seeking then surely that includes sexual orientation and I think what was successful in the South African context was ensuring that the LGBTI community and the discrimination that they faced in the past was seen as part of a more broad oppression or particular ideology that was being implemented so I think it's trying to create the narrative that it should be seen as a pertinent issue because it relates so much to other types of so many other forms of discrimination and oppression that we see. Anyone else want to weigh in on either of these questions? Yes, in the Caribbean we've had a similar strategy we are able to show historically that LGBTI expressions have existed in the Caribbean and that in fact the criminalization has directly been as a result of our being colonized so our unnatural connection law is a direct analog of the UK's section 377 of the old penal code in which we were much more tolerant as a people much more accepting of heterodox sexualities and gender identities. One of the things that we do in our own advocacy is refer to two phrases ZAMI, which as some people might know is actually the name of Ojilod's magnum opus Ojilod was Grenadian by the way and my man know those two phrases are actually very antique phrases the Grenadian phrases were the very antique so what we argue is that why would these phrases have existed historically in Grenada, in the Grenadian context if the people to whom they refer did not exist and that argument has certainly worked to our degree in relation to the prioritization argument is who gets to decide you know because prioritization is never value neutral and who is to argue for instance that a development related issue is more important than LGBTI people being killed or discriminated against and it's also important to show that they don't necessarily operate in silos, well rape is more important than LGBTI issues but rape often occurs of lesbian women for reasons that people call corrective so there's a lot of kind of cross cutting between the two it's not exactly as insular issues are not as insular as people make them out to be I just wanted to respond to the second one because I believe the two panelists have talked about how they've approached the in terms of LGBTI rights as a foreign concept prioritization and this is something that you will constantly get you know we have far more important issues to think about poverty economic social rights well so do LGBTI groups you can be gay and still face poverty and so the argument has always been and should be the intersectionality of those those rights that you can't separate one right from another right and that LGBTI rights are part and parcel of the human rights discourse and you can't prioritize one over the other because they're all linked and you know as Richie had said you can be part of an LGBTI grouping and still be raped so the experiences that the difference are that as a group we are more vulnerable we experience it by you know the challenges that are different in terms of degrees of experiences and again depends on the context so for me I've always used this argument that all the rights are connected they're interlinked this idea of it being intersectional is critical in explaining why it's important not to take that particular line of who do we prioritize now so I just wanted to add a couple of things there so this idea that Richie's talking about of reclaiming this argument has worked in Nepal and it worked in Thailand where they said that a third gender identity is actually part of who we are in these countries and Sunil very much used that argument to advocate for LGBTI rights in Nepal and it seems that under the draft constitution that the current regime in Thailand has put forward the constitution of third gender and you raised India and I think I'm just trying to think about that question with regards to India and I think it's a very important question you raised because what's happening in India at the moment is there is this re-questioning now about the constitutional identity of India and if there was one idea in which India was founded in the constitution of 1950 it was one India right so no more caste it's not that we are Indian Muslim and Indian Hindus we are one India which not necessarily the current government but certainly a lot of the discourse around the current government is re-opening all of these questions and I think that if anything LGBTI should be part of that debate to say that this wasn't what the constitution of India was about discrimination based on who we are so I see it very much as part of the equality debate raging in India at the moment I'm going to take these two questions here together and then we're going to close off the Q&A because we're almost at our time so if you want to introduce yourselves ask your questions and then the panel can respond to the two of them Hi my name is Aisha and I work on the Honduras task in the international narcotics and law enforcement bureau and I see that we've been talking a lot about marriage equality and it's going hand in hand with constitution in some instances and I kind of wanted to ask about the spots that there is a place to address other issues that affect the LGBTQ community in the constitution and just coming from the perspective of Honduras right now not necessarily those rights aren't there for marriage equality however they have addressed issues of HIV or protecting persons with HIV that are also in the LGBTQ community and so I just kind of wanted to see where you guys would see these issues fitting in because they're also important to equality and they overlap with people who may not necessarily identify as well. Thank you all my name is Pepe Julia Nonzima I work with sexual minorities Uganda and I come from Uganda but currently in the States as Reagan Fassel fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy I have two questions about coalition building how do you sustain after a win for instance we formed a civil society coalition to fight the anti-gay law in Uganda and when we petitioned the law in court and won the group sort of became reluctant how do you rebuild that energy to keep fighting other legislations that are restrictive I'm mindful of time but as I speak right now there is talks of reintroduction of another bill but also we have an NGO bill that is being discussed of which targeting LGBT groups like mine and we're also having a constitutional review which a petition by religious leaders has been tabled to the parliament and the constitutional body to further criminalize LGBT people in the constitution we already have same sex marriage prohibited but there's efforts to further criminalize us in the constitution so just speaking your minds about that also to let you know that my project here with the fellowship is actually looking at the constitution because I kind of foresaw that the challenges we are facing right now would come and so for me this discussion is really important thank you very much so I'm going to table those two questions before our panel and I'm going to add one more because we are almost at our time and I feel incumbent as the U.S. Institute of Peace and again harking back on our partnership with the State Department maybe if any of you want to address what can organizations like USIP and IDEA do to support those of you on the front lines those of you on the ground what do the U.S. do from an international policy perspective and other countries as well we've heard you discuss some of the ways we might interfere in fact with your efforts but is there a positive role that we can play so to answer your question first I definitely think there's a positive role that can be played one providing support to local NGOs supporting in the form of funding for different projects in the form of capacity building trainings so that advocates are able to be better advocates and also sort of non-public diplomatic pressures so at the UPR for instance the Universal Periodic Review that's an excellent opportunity for states to kind of give states recommendations that isn't sort of seen as an imperial imposition one-on-one diplomatic conversations is always very useful so those are the ways that I think it certainly can be useful as per the other questions how do you sustain after when I really don't know I don't have we've not had many wins in the Caribbean so as to the question I don't remember your name sorry but from the Honduran context marriage equality is actually not on the agenda for the Caribbean it's something that completely closes the discussion so we've been very deliberate advocacy attempts we've been very particular about avoiding that discussion actually and so what we've been pushing for is constitutional expansions of the anti-discrimination section that include sexual orientation gender identity and HIV as well because in the Caribbean as with the rest of the world MSM are particularly at risk population for HIV AIDS anyone else because I just wanted to mention we had a participant from Kenya who couldn't be here today he would have an interesting answer to your question because in Kenya the constitution defines marriages being between a man and a woman and then the constitution went to referendum he led LGBTI advocates to advocate for the constitution to pass the constitution and he had to explain to them that from where we're coming from to actually have a robust bill of rights a democratic constitution and ways to exercise our rights through a non-discrimination clause by sexual orientation is a victory for us to start with and indeed so it's proof so the reason he can't be here is because he's arguing a case where the court decided that so he wasn't able to register his NGO it was called the Kenyan LGBTI commission or something like this and he wasn't able to register it because they said that the purposes of the NGO were immoral and possibly criminal also and the court overturned that decision said it was against its freedom of association he wasn't able to have an NGO now he can raise money, now he can organize in public and that's one step forward so I think Kenya is actually a good example of why as well as LGBTI LGBTI specific rights in recognition overall democratic and robust bill of rights and democratic framework is a good thing to include in your advocacy toolkit thanks just in relation to sustaining after the win I think you have to celebrate the wins and then you have to analyze them and document them because I think in your analysis you can find out exactly how you have an idea but you can document exactly how that was achieved and also the things that you might have done differently and I think from that we would have done that along the way with our strategic planning and our evaluation and internal evaluation and that helps then to shape the next steps and where the next the next fight is I suppose in relation to some of the work maybe that would be helpful for ESIP is I think well I've certainly really enjoyed my couple of days here but I think there's room and scope for more of this getting activists together advocates from around the world who are working on common issues to come together over the last eight years I've had the privilege of doing that on a number of occasions and I've always found it extremely useful and I've developed relationships and friendships with people from here in the US and South Africa and other countries that have been very valuable both personally and professionally because you can share ideas, bounce things off each other, learn from each other's strategies and wins and failures so there's enormous support in that and even if it isn't always possible to bring people together face to face even putting people in touch with networks and helping people share their research and analysis I think all of that would be very helpful Well listen I want to thank our panelists deeply for sharing your experiences and your insights with us here today in building this advocacy guide your blood, sweat and tears are not just a testament to what's been achieved in your countries but what can be achieved around the world and we're certainly honored and privileged to be a very very small part of bringing that knowledge expanding it further out and being able to stand behind you far behind you in some cases but to be able to say that we're on the right side and so thank you for allowing us to be a small piece of that thank you everyone for coming today sharing your own views and experiences on this really important matter and with that enjoy the rest of the day


Boys must be slow to answer and fast to listen, as it is the only way to pay close attention in class. Well, this was the submission of the wife of the Lagos State Governor, Dr. Ibicha Keswamolu, while addressing students of the closing ceremony of the three-day boy-initiative workshop held at Badere Lagos. A correspondent love Iku Koyedeku tells us more in this report. It was expository, educating and informative for these boys. About 160 of them selected from secondary schools, special correctional centres and orphanage homes across the state took part in the three-day workshop. The boys were taken through a series of topics ranging from security to drug abuse, autism, vocational education, media literacy, family values, and sexual and gender-based violence among others. We must confirm every video you see, every story that you get, every picture you see. You must confirm first before you forward to other people. Looking at you young women today, coming here through the knowledge or the active participation of us ladies is a transformational experience that involves all of us. The workshop was an essential component of the Nova Boy Child Initiative of the First Lady of Lagos State. It was designed to bring issues affecting boys to the front boner and profile workable solutions. According to the Boy Child Initiative, identifying with the Boy Child Initiative, we purposely called them into this meeting so that they see what the charge is about. They take it back into the different ministries. They take it back to make policies. They understand the challenges that we have. They're not new, manpower, capacity development, very important, the infrastructure to keep on improving it. Tapmost and Dr Ibidye Kesa-Wonlou's mind was cutting these boys young and making them problem solvers. There's nothing stopping our children from sweeping the floor in the morning, dusting the environment before they go to their classes, ensuring that their beds are laid. Any bed that is not made, that child has to come back. In their goodwill messages, officials of the Lagos State Government harped on the need for participants to show their social vices and concentrate on their academics. We ceremony saw some of the boys cutting away awards and other prizes. Love Ikuku Uyiduku, plus TV News.