[vc_row el_id=”post”][vc_column width=”2/3″ el_class=”sideLeftPost”][vc_raw_html el_id=”postImgDestaque”]JTNDZGl2JTIwY2xhc3MlM0QlMjJpbnNlcnRJbnNpZGUlMjIlM0UlM0MlMkZkaXYlM0U=[/vc_raw_html][vc_empty_space][vc_column_text]In June, LGBTQIA+ Pride Month is celebrated. We invited Professor José Carvalho to discuss the rights acquired by this community in recent years, as well as the role of the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches in this struggle. Check out the interview below:
- Comment on some achievements of the LGBTQIA+ cause in recent years.
We have had several achievements in Brazil and around the world. There are still countries that criminalize individuals' sexual orientation, but we have seen a trend toward combating these laws. The most contemporary decisions enforce the right to equality to protect LGBTQIA+ people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
In some situations, progress on this agenda does not occur through legislation, but through interventions by the Judiciary, which, in order to protect the fundamental rights enshrined in law, needs to intervene in cases of omissions by the Executive and Legislative branches regarding the enactment of public policies and normative acts that promote equality.
- How have judicial decisions contributed to the achievement of civil rights for the LGBTQIA+ population?
The role of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and the Constitutional Courts in the fight for LGBTQIA+ civil rights is essential. We are dealing with a minority population that is unable to have its demands heard in traditional political institutions, especially within the legislative branch.
In Brazil, the main achievements regarding the LGBTQIA+ community have stemmed from judicial decisions. For example, Supreme Federal Court (STF) rulings recognized the legitimacy of civil unions between same-sex couples and the possibility for transgender individuals to change their civil registry – regardless of sex reassignment surgery, thus facilitating the process. The STF also declared unconstitutional regulations that prohibited homosexual and bisexual men from donating blood. Furthermore, more recently, the body ruled unconstitutional norms that prohibited sexual and gender education in schools, considering that human rights education is one of the main ways to combat discrimination.
We also see this practice in other countries. In the United States, it was the U.S. Supreme Court that recognized the possibility of same-sex marriage and determined that discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation or gender identity is prohibited.
- How important is the Supreme Court's leading role in these issues for the population?
In addition to its contributions to curbing discriminatory practices and recognizing civil rights for the LGBTQIA+ population, the organization also has the educational function of guiding society and public authorities regarding respect and the need for a tolerant and pluralistic society, where the diversity and autonomy of people are recognized, so that they can live their lives without being persecuted, oppressed, or deprived of basic rights.
There is a very symbolic decision by the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF), in which the court recognized the unconstitutionality of using the terms "pederasty" and "homosexual" in Article 235 of the Military Penal Code (CPM), considering them discriminatory and reinforcing historical and systemic prejudices. This decision is representative because, in practice, the crime is the same, but the STF declared the unconstitutionality of using a pejorative expression, which is quite relevant in building a more just and egalitarian society.
- What are the implications for Brazil of the recent achievements and actions of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) regarding the LGBTQIA+ movement? What can we expect for the future?
The expectation for the future is that the Executive and Legislative branches, both in terms of public policy development and the enactment of regulations, will not use prejudiced terms and will pay attention to the need for plurality, respect, and diversity in the political decisions implemented.
The idea is that these issues are already respected in the decision-making processes of the authorities. However, I realize that, at least in the near future, the intervention of the judiciary, especially the Supreme Federal Court (STF), will still be very necessary. We have some cases pending before the STF regarding the discussion of basic rights of the LGBTQIA+ community, for example, a case discussing the possibility of using a bathroom compatible with an individual's gender identity. Note that we are facing a fundamental reflection: we all use bathrooms daily and, in general, we don't need to claim this right, but some people in the LGBTQIA+ community have to request it.
Ideally, these decisions would be made by the Executive and Legislative branches, but due to a structural omission in the protection of civil rights, judicial intervention is necessary to protect these minorities. Today, thanks to the Supreme Federal Court (STF), we can get married, adopt, and share health insurance plans. Therefore, it is preferable that action comes from the judiciary rather than allowing violations of fundamental rights to continue to perpetuate. url(http://homologacao.idp.edu.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/bn_contato_idp-1980×300-1.jpg?id=5274) !important;background-position: center !important;background-repeat: no-repeat !important;background-size: cover !important;}” el_class=”postCTA”][vc_column][themeum_action alignment=”left” title=”STILL HAVE QUESTIONS?” title_style=”customstyle” title_heading=”h2″ title_size=”20″ title_color=”#ffffff” title_weight=”800″ title_margin=”53px 0 0″ title_padding=”0″ btn_position=”btnright” btntext=”CONTACT US” btnurl=”/contact/” btntype=”white” btnsize=”btn-lg”][/vc_column][/vc_row]
