Dr Inġ. Patrick Attard: Library on Gay-Rights in Malta and Beyond

European Greens: EU Parliament condemns proposed death penalty for homosexuality in Uganda

2009-12-18T14:56:00.007+01:00

PRESS RELEASE - Strasbourg, 17 December 2009

The European Parliament has today adopted a resolution condemning a planned law in Uganda that would make homosexuality punishable by death and would impose prison terms of up to three years for any person who fails to report (within 24 hours) the identities of everyone they know who is lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

UK Green MEP Jean Lambert commented:

"I am profoundly shocked by the parliamentary bill in Uganda, which proposes to introduce the death penalty for people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) and imprisonment for those who do not denounce others. The proposal in the Ugandan Parliament goes against the most fundamental principles of human rights and democracy. It is indefensible to threaten people's lives on grounds of who they are.

I welcome Parliament's condemnation of the proposed law and call for the EU to take a strong stance on worrying developments elsewhere. In Rwanda, amendments have been submitted to the penal code with a view to criminalise homosexuality as well as any activity of promotion and sensitisation on the issue."

Austrian Green MEP Ulrike Lunacek, Greens/EFA foreign affairs spokesperson and Co-President of the EP's LGBT Intergroup, commented:

"I am very pleased that the European Parliament has condemned Uganda's plan to introduce the death penalty on grounds of sexual orientation. The anti-homosexuality bill in Uganda is a legal assault against human dignity. It also stands in clear contradiction to international human rights provisions to which Uganda has signed up, including in the Cotonou Agreement with the EU.

I will use all my contacts to Uganda in order to prevent the bill from becoming law. Homosexuality is not "un-African" as some African leaders claim, but has been and will be a universal feature of human life. LGBT people need protection and acceptance, not hate legislation."

Chris Coakley
Press Officer
The Greens/EFA in the European Parliament
Tel: Brussels +32 2 2841667 / Strasbourg +33 3 88174375;

Mobile: +32-485-241622; Fax: 0032 2 2844944

---
Related articles:

PinkNews: Uganda will reportedly drop plans for the execution and life imprisonment of gays

PinkNews: Gordon Brown raises anti-gay laws with Ugandan president

MaltaToday: The unholy war [Gonzi vs Mintoff in the 1960's]

2009-12-18T01:53:00.008+01:00

Published in a collection of MaltaToday editions in September 2005
by Michaela Muscat

The notorious ‘interdett’ is part of a tragic episode in Maltese history when the island was split between the competing aspirations of the Malta Labour Party and the Catholic Church for the future of the island beyond colonialism.

[You can read the collection of articles here: http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2005/10/09/pix/interdett.pdf

Click here to read the pastoral letter issued by Mgr Gonzi against the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1972.]

L-Orizzont: Id-diskriminazzjoni f’Malta tibqa’ ma titrażżanx

2009-12-17T16:16:00.001+01:00

http://www.l-orizzont.com/news.asp?newsitemid=58998

17.12.9 minn Ufficcju Informazzjoni u Media tal-GWU

Ftit ilu l-Ewrobarometru lesta studju li kien għamel bejn Mej ju u Ġunju li għaddew dwar id-diskriminazzjoni għas-sena 2009 fis-27 pajjiż tal-Unjoni Ewropea. Dan l-istudju wera, b’fomm il-Maltin stess li ġew in tervistati, li d-diskriminazzjoni għadha rampanti f’mill-inqas erba’ oqsma fejn matul iż-żmien ftit li xejn sar biex din is-sitwazzjoni tiġi rimedjata.

Skont dan ir-rapport, id-diskriminazzjoni f’pajjiżna għadha tinħass sew u taqbeż sostanzjalment il-medja tal-Unjoni Ewropea fir-rigward tal-oriġini etnika u l-orjentazzjonmi sesswali, filwaqt li d-diskriminazzjoni f’pajjiżna fir-rigward ta’ età, di żabilità u ugwaljanza bejn is-sessi, għalkemm għadha għolja xorta hija kemm kemm inqas mill-medja tal-Unjoni Ewropea.

Dak li rriżulta mill-istudju tal-Ew robarometru huwa ta’ min jixtarru għax għandu għal xiex iħasseb billi juri li l-isforzi li qegħdin isiru f’pajjiżna biex id-diskriminazzjoni f’kull forma titnaqqas għadhom mhux qegħdin jilħqu l-għanijiet tagħ hom kemm suppost.

F’pajjiżna ilna mhux ħażin nippriedkaw li l-opportunita jiet ikunu indaqs u l-istess għal kulħadd. Saħansitra għaddejna liġi u tajniha dan l-istess isem, iżda minkejja din il-liġi għadna ferm bogħod biex ngħidu li lħaqna dak li trid il-liġi. Għax għadna nisimgħu b’diversi każi fejn l-opportunitajiet mhumiex ikunu indaqs u aċċessibbli għal kulħadd l-istess.

Jekk insemmu s-sitwazzjoni tal-persuni b’diżabilità, li skont ir-rapport tal-Ewrobarometru d-dis kri minazzjoni f’dan il-qa sam tpoġġiet fir-raba’ post wara l-etniċità, l-orjentazzjoni sesswali u l-età, insibu li l-liġi dwar l-opportunitajiet indaqs qiegħda tiġi injorata kontinwament billi sidien ta’ postijiet tax-xogħol ma jħaddmux magħhom persuni b’diżabilità.

Jiġifieri anke f’dan il-qasam, mhux imbilli ngħaddu l-liġijiet u minn fuq noqogħdu niftaħru kemm qegħdin nieħdu ħsieb dawk bi bżonnijiet speċjali meta mbagħad bil-liġijiet u l-ftaħir kollu s-sitwazzjoni għal bosta persuni tibqa’ ma tinbidilx.

L-istess fis-suq tax-xogħol. Id-diskriminazzjoni mhux talli mhix tonqos iżda donnu jidher li qiegħda ssir aktar rampanti. Għax għad hawn sidien ta’ pos tijiet tax-xogħol li ma jiddejqu xejn jiddiskriminaw anke sa ħansitra dwar l-orjentazzjoni sess wali tal-individwu. Dan fih innifsu mhux biss jikkwalifika għal diskriminazzjoni imma agħar minn hekk, għat-tkasbir tad-drittijiet tal-bniedem.

Imbagħad hemm ukoll diskriminazzjoni ma taqta’ xejn ma’ ħaddiema, sew Maltin u anke barranin, li mhumiex organizzati fi trejdunjin. Dawn għadhom imċaħħdin minn kull protezzjoni soċjali u qegħdin jiġu sfruttati fil-kundizzjonijiet tax-xogħol li mhumiex denji għad-dinjità tal-bniedem fis-seklu 21.

Ħafna drabi dawn il-ħaddiema jiġu anke mheddin bl-im pjieg tagħhom biex iżommu bogħod mit-trejdunjins. U dan qed jiġri anke minkejja li l-Kostituzzjoni Repubblikana ta’ paj jiżna, li nhar il-Ħadd li għadda ċċelebrajna l-35 anniversarju tagħ ha, tipproteġi l-prinċipju u d-dritt tal-libertà tal-assoċjazzjoni. Diskriminazzjoni agħar minn din ftit issib meta jitqies li l-kostituzzjoni hija suprema fil-protezzjoni tad-drittijiet fundamentali tal-bniedem.

Dawn huma ftit mill-każi fejn id-diskriminazzjoni hija eviden ti f’paj jiżna llum. Nittamaw li l-istħarriġ tal-Eurobarometer iser vi biex paj jiżna jixpruna lilu nnifsu u jiġġieled bis-serjetà l-ġlieda kontra d-dis kriminazzjo ni fil-forom kollha tagħ ha.

Jekk pajjiżna ma jagħmilx hekk se jibqa’ jkollna aktar nies diskri minati u sfruttati u allura nku nu qegħdin nidħqu bina nfusna meta ngħidu li f’Malta l-opportunitajiet huma ndaqs u l-istess għal kulħadd.

Se tiddaħħal id-Direttiva dwar is-Servizzi

Il-pajjiżi kollha tal-Unjoni Ew ropea jridu jimplimentaw sat-28 ta’ dan ix-xahar id-Diret tiva dwar is-Servizzi.

Skont il-Kummissjoni Ewropea, din id-di rettiva għandha trendi l-ħajja eħfef għan-negozji li jipprovdu jew jużaw servizzi fl-Unjoni Ewropea. Dan se jsir billi jitneħħew l-ostakli legali u amministrattivi li se jieħdu ħsieb biex l-aċċess għas-suq ikun aktar facli.

Id-Direttiva dwar is-Servizzi kienet adottata f’Diċembru tal-2006 wara l-kontroversja li kienet qajmet billi kienet tinklu di li x-xogħol portwali jkun jis ta’ jsir ukoll mill-ekwipaġġi tal-vapuri merkantili u mhux biss mill-ħaddiema tax-xatt.

Din id-direttiva, li dakinhar kie net aktar magħrufa bħala l-“Bolkenstein Directive” kienet thedded l-impjiegi tal-ħaddiema tax-xatt fil-portijiet Ewro pej, inkluż ta’ pajjiżna, u alla ħares ma kinux it-trejdunjins Ewropej, fosthom il-GWU, li mmexxijin mill-ETUC kienu rre żistew l-adozzjoni tad-Diret tiva.

Wara dan l-episodju, fejn il-Parlament Ewropew ma kienx approva d-Direttiva, saru attentati oħrajn minn interessi kummercjali biex idgħajfu s-saħħa tat-trejdunjins u taħt l-is kuża tal-kummerċ ħieles, ikun faċilitat l-isfruttament tal-ħaddiema.

Għalkemm, bix-xogħol tal-ETUC u l-ħidma tal-Gruppi tax-Xellug fil-Parlament Ewro pew twaqqfu dak li riedu n-negozjanti l-kbar, xorta waħda sabu lill-Qorti Ewropea tagħtihom palata bid-deċiżjonijiet tagħha f’diversi każi, fosthom il-każ klassiku tal-kumpanija minn Latvja, Laval li ħadet kuntratt ta’ xogħol fl-Isvezja. F’dan il-każ, il-Qorti Ewropea kienet iddeċidiet favur il-kumpanija u ċaħħdet lill-ħaddiema Latvjani mill-kundizzjonijiet tax-xogħol tal-ħaddie ma Svediżi u allura wkoll mill-protezzjoni trejdunjonistika li jgawdu l-ħaddiema fl-Isvezja.

B’dik id-deċiżjoni tal-Qorti Ew ropea, kum paniji u kuntratturi ngħataw id-dritt li jagħ tu lill-ħaddiema tagħhom pagi u kundizzjonijiet tal-pajjiż minn fejn ikunu oriġinaw u mhux dawk tal-pajjiż fejn iku nu qegħdin jaħdmu.

Fi ftit kliem dan ifisser li jekk ħaddiema Maltin jintbagħ tu għal xi żmien jaħdmu f’xi pajjiż ieħor tal-Unjoni Ewropea, il-pagi u l-kundizzjonijiet li jkollhom dawn il-ħaddiema jkunu daqs li kieku baqgħu jaħdmu f’Malta u mhux il-pagi u l-kundizzjonijiet tal-ħaddiema tal-pajjiż li jkunu ntbagħtu jaħdmu fih. Dan ukoll jikkwa lifika għal sfruttament tal-ħaddiema.

Issa, bid-Direttiva tas-Ser vizzi li se tidħol fis-seħħ lejn l-aħħar ta’ din is-sena, kuntratturi barranin jieħdu kuntratti mingħajr irbit tar-regoli lokali u l-pagi u l-kundizzjonijiet iku nu determinati mill-kuntrattur.

Filwaqt li wieħed ma jistax jiċħad il-vantaġġi li d-Direttiva se toħloq biex tiffaċilita l-aċ ċess għal kumpaniji żgħar u daqs medju u għal kuntratturi biex jagħtu servizz f’pajjiż ieħor tal-Unjoni Ewropea, min-naħa l-oħra iżda d-Diretti va ma titkellem xejn dwar il-kun dizzjonijiet u l-protezzjoni tal-ħaddiema. U dan kollu f’isem it-twaqqiegħ tal-barrieri biex is-suq tas-servizzi jkun ħie les mill-irbit u x-xkiel buro kratiku.

Filwaqt li hu veru li hemm direttivi Ewropej oħrajn li jsos tnu l-protezzjoni tal-ħaddiema, b’danakollu, id-de ċiż jo ni jiet tal-Qorti Ewropea ħol qu preċedenti li faċli jkunu ap pli kati minn interessi u negozji u l-vittma jibqa’ jkun dejjem il-ħaddiem.

[Peter] Tatchell stands down as Green candidate

2009-12-16T16:01:00.001+01:00

Brain injuries from Mugabe and Moscow bashings thwart bid to be Oxford East MP

http://www.petertatchell.net/politics/tatchell-stands-down-as-green-candidate.html
London – 16 December 2009

“It is with great regret and reluctance that I am standing down as the Green Party parliamentary candidate for Oxford East. My brain injuries from the Mugabe and Moscow bashings mean that I would not be able to campaign effectively in the general election or do the duties required of an MP, if I was elected,” human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell announced today.

“It would not be right for me to seek election if I could not do the job of an MP to the high standards that I want and that Oxford East voters have a right to expect.

“If I was elected, I could manage the parliamentary duties or the constituency work. But my health is not strong enough for me to do both.

“This is huge disappointment and frustration. Oxford East is a target Green seat. In the county elections in June, the Greens were neck-and-neck with the Liberal Democrats as the main challenger to Labour. The European elections saw the Greens win in Oxford East, well ahead of Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories.

“The brain damage caused by Mugabe’s thugs in Brussels in 2001 and by neo-Nazis in Moscow in 2007 has been compounded by head injuries in an accident while I was campaigning in Devon in July. A bus on which I was travelling swerved and braked sharply. I was thrown forward, hitting my head on a metal handrail.

“The injuries don’t stop me from campaigning but I am slower, make more mistakes, get tired easily and take longer to do things. My memory, concentation, balance and coordination have been adversley affected. I can’t campaign at the pace I used to.

“I was selected as the Green Party candidate for Oxford East in April 2007. A month later, I was badly beaten around the head by neo-Nazis during an attempted Gay Pride parade in Moscow.

See here: http://www.petertatchell.net/international/moscowgayarrests.htm

“This exacerbated the brain damage caused when I was bashed unconscious by President Mugabe’s bodyguards in Brussels in 2001, after attempting to make a citizen’s arrest of the Zimbabwean leader on charges of torture.

See here: http://www.petertatchell.net/international/mugabearrest.htm

“Following the Moscow assault, I never rested and recuperated. I carried on campaigning, with a very heavy schedule of commitments in Oxford East. After several months, I was severely exhausted. This stress and exhaustion probably intensified the damage and thwarted my recovery.

“I have postponed making this announcement for several months, in the hope that I might get better and be able to carry on as the Green candidate. Unfortunately, my condition has not improved. If anything, it is worse.

“There is, however, a glimmer of hope for the future. The medical advice is that if I slow down and reduce my workload my condition may improve in a year or so. On the downside, I am unlikely to ever recover fully. Some of the damage is probably permanent.

“I don’t regret a thing. Getting a thrashing and brain injuries was not what I had expected or wanted. But I was aware of the risks. Taking risks is sometimes necessary, in order to challenge injustice. My beatings had the positive effect of helping draw international attention to the violent, repressive nature of the Russian and Zimbabwean regimes. I’m glad of that.

“My physical inconveniences are nothing by comparison to the far worse beatings inflicted on human rights defenders in countries like Russia, Iran, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, Columbia, Sudan and Burma. These heroic activists often end up jailed or dead. I count myself lucky.

“The Oxford Green Party expects to select a new parliamentary candidate in January. That person will have my wholehearted support. I intend to campaign with them during the general election.

“I would like to thank members of Oxford Green Party for their immense kindness, support, and generosity during my two and a half years as their candidate. It has been a pleasure working with the Oxford Greens and I wish them future success,” said Mr Tatchell.

YouTube: Jack & Bobby - Lost Boys

2009-12-15T17:30:00.000+01:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24GmMzhqfgQ

Episode clips from the highly praised "Lost Boys" episode of the critically acclaimed-but-cancelled series "Jack & Bobby". This episode won a GLAAD media award.

YouTube: Malta Gay Rights Movement [Interview on Human Rights Day]

2009-12-14T03:39:00.001+01:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bllrFhjyM2Q

On Human Rights Day 2009.
A descriptive interview of the activities of The Malta Gay Rights Movement
http://www.maltagayrights.net/

DOI: 61st Anninversar of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: ‘Embrace Diversity, End Discrimination’

2009-12-12T16:19:00.002+01:00

Department of Information, Malta, Press Release Number 2134.

Today, the 10th of December the World is commemorating the 61st anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The Declaration adopted 61 years ago affirmed the universal validity of human rights for the very first time. The focus of this year’s anniversary is Non-discrimination.

Commemorating this declaration, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Tonio Borg issued the following statement:

"Human rights are one of the most precious assets of human civilization. The adoption of the Universal Declaration in 1948 was a signal of hope – hope for a world which lay in ruins following the Second World War. But even today, unfortunately human rights are an unfulfilled promise for many people. Our most difficult task is not to declare yet again how good and important human rights are. What counts are concrete endeavours to close the gap between aspiration and reality in implementing human rights.

This year’s focus on non-discrimination should help politicians and policy-makers to further question the policies adopted by their countries, and ask if these are truly helping to eradicate discrimination, not only in their respective countries but also internationally.

Politicians are obliged to act in order to stop discrimination. We should all work to build a more inclusive society. Discrimination is still rampant in many third world countries, but one should not only look to these countries and stop there. We should always be aware that although in developed countries, laws and rules do exist to combat discrimination; reality sometimes does not always prove to be a correct one. Sometimes discrimination is silent, we might not be aware of it, because those who are suffering do so in silence, and loneliness.

Here I wish to quote the message by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon for this year’s anniversary: “Discrimination targets individuals and groups that are vulnerable to attack: the disabled, women and girls, the poor, migrants, minorities, and all those who are perceived as different.... But these victims of discrimination are not alone. The United Nations is standing with them, committed to defending the rights of all, and particularly the most vulnerable. That is our identity and our mission.”

The Government of Malta is committed to continue combating discrimination. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is already helping out third world countries through its Overseas Development Aid. The Ministry’s commitment for this year will help 9 local NGO’s and philanthropic institutions to deliver projects in third world countries, that will help not only to combat poverty, but also help fight discrimination.”

DOI – 10.12.2009

PinkNews: Uganda will reportedly drop plans for the execution and life imprisonment of gays.

2009-12-10T21:06:00.002+01:00

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/10/uganda-to-remove-death-penalty-from-anti-gay-bill/

10.12.9 by Jessica Geen

An 'anti-homosexuality' bill has been passing through the country's parliament but according to news agency Bloomberg, some of the most drastic measures will be removed.

The bill provoked worldwide outrage when it was first tabled. America, the UK and France all expressed concern, as did countless human rights and gay organisations.

Gay rights groups have urged Commonwealth leaders to throw Uganda out of the Commonwealth unless it drops the proposed law.

The minister for ethics and integrity, James Nsaba Buturo, reportedly said a more "refined" set of punishments would be favoured instead of execution.

Although it is not clear what this means, he pointed to so-called 'gay cure' therapies, saying the bill would promote counselling for gay people.

Buturo said the modified draft bill would come before parliament within two weeks.

If the provisions for execution and life imprisonment are dropped, the bill still places severe penalties on gay people, their families and those who work for gay organisations.

Other offences include promoting homosexuality, aiding and abetting homosexuality and keeping a house "for purposes of homosexuality".

Some have suggested the bill is so badly written, it could threaten two men who hug with jail terms.

The MP who tabled the bill, David Bahati, has argued his bill will protect children, youths and the "traditional family".

The reported concessions come days after a Swedish minister suggested that aid funds to Uganda could be cut if it persevered with the proposed laws.

Buturo retorted: "It is revealing that support to Uganda literally translated means that it is on condition that Uganda should do the bidding of givers of such support regardless of what Ugandans themselves think."

PinkNews: Austria's parliament legalises civil unions

2009-12-10T21:04:00.000+01:00

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/10/austrias-parliament-legalises-civil-unions/#

10.12.9

Austria's parliament has approved legalising civil unions in the country.

Out of 174 lawmakers present, 110 voted in favour and 64 voted against, Associated Press reports.

The law is due to come into force on January 1st. It will provide gay couples with some of the rights and benefits enjoyed by heterosexual couples.

However, it reiterates the ban on gay couples adopting children or using IVF and artificial insemination.

Instead, benefits granted include rights to social security claims, inheritance and court trials.

Gay couples will not be able to hold their ceremonies at civil registry offices, as heterosexual couples do. Instead, they will have to register at the municipal office or the magistrate's office.

YouTube: Gay Education

2009-12-10T17:36:00.000+01:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PooEhBxh0NY

Daily Mail: All homosexuals should be stoned to death, says Muslim preacher of hate

2009-12-09T16:26:00.005+01:00

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1163510/All-homosexuals-stoned-death-says-Muslim-preacher-hate.html

By SAM GREENHILL
Last updated at 12:34 AM on 21st March 2009

Comments (33)

All homosexuals should face stoning to death, a Muslim preacher of hate declared yesterday.

Anjem Choudary, the firebrand cleric who wants to see Britain ruled by Sharia law, said such a regime was the only way to fix the country's ills.

Under it, adulterers and homosexuals would be killed by stoning. Asked if that would include anybody - even a Cabinet minister such as Business Secretary Lord Mandelson - Choudary responded with an astonishing diatribe.

Enlarge

Hate, hate and more hate: Anjem Choudary (centre), flanked by two cohorts, prepares to give a press conference on Friday in which he says homosexuals should be stoned to death

He said: 'If a man likes another man, it can happen, but if you go on to fulfil your desire, if it is proved, then there is a punishment to follow. You don't stone to death unless there are four eyewitnesses. It is a very stringent procedure.

'There are some people who are attracted to donkeys but that does not mean it is right.'

Choudary was speaking at a press conference in London arranged by Muslim extremists to justify their protest in Luton last week against soldiers returning home from Iraq.

His incendiary remarks immediately prompted calls for him to be investigated by police. Tory MP Patrick Mercer said: 'These statements show the depravity of this man's beliefs. They must incite hatred and encourage terrorism, and I would encourage the Metropolitan Police to investigate them as rigorously as possible.'

The Rev Sharon Ferguson, chief executive of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, said: 'This is appalling. The police should look very closely at what has been said to see if there is any action they should be taking.'

Contempt: Muslim protesters hurl insults at the homecoming parade of British soldiers in Luton

Police were not at the press conference but a Scotland Yard spokesman said officers would investigate if a complaint was made.

Only last week, Choudary, a self-styled 'judge of the Sharia Court of the UK', was defending the shameful protests against soldiers parading through Luton after a tour of duty in Iraq.

Yet a week ago, the Daily Mail exposed fundamentalist Choudary's student days when he was pictured swigging beer, cavorting with women and puffing on a cannabis joint - offences for which he would be lashed and stoned under his version of Sharia law. Yesterday he sheepishly confessed:

'Yes, I was not always practising Islam. Certainly in my student days I was not a practising Muslim.'

Wake-up call: Omar Bakri has warned of another 7/7-style attack

Yesterday Choudary, 42, was flanked by two fellow firebrands at the press conference at the Express by Holiday Inn Hotel in Chingford, East London.

It started with warning from fellow hate cleric Omar Bakri, who warned that Britons should 'wake up before it is too late' or suffer another 7/7 terror attack.

The preacher threatened that ordinary Muslims living here would rise up and retaliate for the 'evil' acts of British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bakri, banned from Britain four years ago, broadcast his threats from his Lebanon bolthole over a speakerphone.

In London, sitting alongside Choudary was Ishtiaq Alamgir, another ringleader of the Luton protests, who accused British soldiers of torture, rape and murder. He said: 'Those British soldiers have blood on their hands.'

A third firebrand, Abu Abdullah, 30, branded the British Government 'tyrannical' and warned: 'Do not relax, do not recline, or you will be touched by the fire of hell.'

Times: Ask your MEP - The principle of non-discrimination

2009-12-09T16:18:00.002+01:00

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091209/opinion/the-principle-of-non-discrimination

Wednesday, 9th December 2009 by Simon Busuttil

The Times recently gave prominent coverage to a proposal submitted in the European Parliament to recognise same-sex marriages. The proposal was eventually replaced by an amendment I tabled. But, understandably, it created a great deal of controversy - both in Malta and elsewhere in Europe - and it calls for a clear explanation of what exactly took place in Strasbourg last month.

First of all, the context.

Parliament was voting on a resolution relating to the so-called Stockholm Programme, which is the European Union's road map for the establishment of an area of freedom, justice and security.

The programme covers a vast range of issues spanning from civil liberties to terrorism and from immigration to visa-free travel. In all these areas, the European Parliament is now fully involved as a co-legislator.

But because it also covers civil liberties, the resolution became embroiled in a controversy over one single paragraph - out of about 150 - that called for the recognition of same-sex marriages contracted in other EU countries. This paragraph, pushed by the Liberal group, called on "Member states to ensure that the principle of mutual recognition is also applied to same-sex couples in the EU - notably married couples, partners or de facto couples - at least in relation to rights relating to freedom of movement".

The issue of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation is not new to the European Parliament.

My position and that of my political group, the EPP, is that we uphold the principle of non-discrimination, including on the basis of sexual discrimination, which is already part of EU law. We are, therefore, committed to co-operate to combat discrimination and to strive towards a more inclusive society, including the gay community.

A number of countries, including Malta, are even preparing to legislate in order to afford a set of rights and obligations to cohabiting couples, including same-sex couples. They are free to do so.

However, we do not favour same-sex marriage and, therefore, we do not support the obligation to recognise same-sex marriages contracted in other EU countries.

We consider that countries are and should remain free to decide for themselves whether they want to legalise such marriages and, indeed, this matter is not within the EU competence. Nor should it be.

Likewise, we consider that member states should not be required to recognise same-sex marriages contracted in other EU countries. So far, just four EU countries have legalised such marriages, namely, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden and Spain. Others may follow suit. But it should be up to them to do so not the EU.

This is why our group opposed the insertion of this paragraph in the final resolution on the Stockholm Programme and this reference, if included, would have precluded us from supporting the final resolution.

But unlike us, many other groups in the European Parliament do favour such an approach - especially the principle of mutual recognition of same-sex marriages - and that is why the issue is deeply divisive.

Ahead of last month's plenary session, intense negotiations were undertaken to try and find a way out of this impasse. It was not easy.

As the EPP spokesman on this area, I was in charge of negotiations on this issue and I approached other groups in order to find a compromise that a majority could live with.

I proposed that the principle of mutual recognition should be applied only in the case of countries that have already legalised same-sex marriages. In other words, if a same-sex couple gets married in Belgium, their marriage should be recognised in, say, the Netherlands or Spain where such marriages are already legal, but not in, say, Italy or Malta, where they are not. This proposal was not accepted by the Liberals because they felt it did not go far enough.

In the event, an alternative compromise was found with the Socialist group on another wording which stated that "without prejudice to national legislations on family law", EU countries should "ensure freedom of movement to EU citizens and their families, including registered partnerships and marriages, according to articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2004/38/EC, avoiding all kinds of discriminations on all ground including sexual orientation".

This compromise wording had the benefit of recognising the principle of non-discrimination on all grounds.

But at the same time it preserved the right of individual countries to decide for themselves on issues relating to family law. It also removed any reference to mutual recognition.

This means that EU citizens who have entered into a same-sex marriage can benefit from freedom of movement within the EU - like all other EU citizens - but this would not entail a recognition of their married status in other EU countries.

It's a fine balance and, as is often the case, when you strive to reach a compromise you do not make everyone happy. But it was a reasonable compromise and that is why it obtained the support of a strong majority.

The compromise replaced the original paragraph that we opposed and, therefore, enabled my group to support the entire resolution on the Stockholm Programme, which reflects political priorities that our group holds close to heart, such as the all-important policy of combating illegal immigration and of ensuring an effective solidarity in the area of asylum.

The issue of non-discrimination will not stop here. It will come again.

But this episode teaches us that this is not a zero-sum game and that there are parameters that need to be respected. The principle of subsidiarity, allowing individual countries to decide for themselves on such sensitive matters, is one of them.

Dr Busuttil is a Nationalist member of the European Parliament. [www.simonbusuttil.eu]

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

---

See also:

Simon Busuttil: [Against] Recognition of same-sex marriages

Times: MEPs undo same-sex marriage proposal; Reason prevailed, compromise found - Busuttil

EU: Il-programm ta' Stokkolma: L-MEPs iridu iktar drittijiet għaċ-ċittadini

Times: Christian understanding of God [regarding Imam's comments]

2009-12-09T16:14:00.003+01:00

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091207/letters/christian-understanding-of-god

Monday, 7th December 2009 by Fr Mario Attard OFM Cap, San Ġwann

God is a controversial subject as much as it is intriguing. Both believers and non-believers have their own views about God. The tones of the discussion might differ according to the diverging ideas presented for argumentation.

Nevertheless, there are some concepts which, by their very nature, are unacceptable to endorse. For instance, I find it pretty horrible to accept a God who is portrayed as a ruthless judge and knows no mercy in the way he exercises his judgment. How can a God who chops off the hands of thieves and carries out capital punishment on those who are engaged in same-sex marriages, homosexuality, adultery and abortion can ever qualify to be merciful? Additionally, it is very worrying to hear that such a God is so cool and tranquil to end a human person's life much on the same lines as an enraged master would kill a disobedient servant.

Personally speaking, the Christian understanding of God tends to solicit in me more faith and trust in Him. The reason that compels me to hold such a view is neatly expressed by what Jesus said to Nicodemus: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him" (Jn 3, 16-17).

In Pope Benedict XVI's words in his encyclical letter Deus Caritas Est, "faith tells us that God has given his Son for our sakes and gives us the victorious certainty that it is really true: God is love!" (§ 39). Only an omnipotent God can send His Son into this world to die for fallen humanity.

God's omnipotence is powerfully shown in Jesus' incarnation, self-oblation on the cross and His glorious resurrection. The Christian God is mighty not because He is violent and bloodthirsty but because He is merciful. As the Son of God, Jesus unveiled the merciful face of God the Father to us. Hence, Pope John Paul II, in his encyclical which treats God's mercy, Dives In Misericordia, says: "Making the Father present as love and mercy is, in Christ's own consciousness, the fundamental touchstone of His mission as the Messiah" (§ 3).

The Christian God is a loving God specifically because He is a merciful God. This is so since, for Christianity, "mercy is an indispensable dimension of love; it is as it were love's second name and, at the same time, the specific manner in which love is revealed and effected vis-a-vis the reality of the evil that is in the world, affecting and besieging man, insinuating itself even into his heart and capable of causing him to 'perish in Gehenna'" (§ 7).

The sympathisers of a violent God may fear that non-violence denudes God from his justice. According to Christianity though, the opposite is true. A God, who is just, must necessarily be merciful. Think, for instance, of the parable of the Prodigal Son. The father had every right to punish his son for being a wayward. Instead, he said to his servants: "Bring quickly the best robe and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet; and bring the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and make merry, for this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found" (Lk 15, 22-24).

Such a merciful response of God's gratuitous mercy to obstinate human beings highly impels the latter to show mercy in their dealings with one another. "Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful" (Lk 6, 36). Within the social context of everyday life, this would imply that "true mercy is, so to speak, the most profound source of justice. If justice is in itself suitable for 'arbitration' between people concerning the reciprocal distribution of objective goods in an equitable manner, love and only love (including that kindly love that we call 'mercy') is capable of restoring man to himself" (§ 14).

The awesomeness of the Christian God shines in the fact that He does not make victims of His justice but He is himself becomes the victim of love on the cross. The Christian God is not revengeful or a puppet of his murderous wrath but an ever-forgiving God. When he was dying on the cross, the Son of God prayed and forgave his executioners. "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do" (Lk 23, 34).

In being merciful and forgiving, the Christian God is just and omnipotent. "How great is the mercy of the Lord and his forgiveness for those who turn to Him!" (Sir 17, 29).

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

Kotba Maltin: Homosexuality: Challenging the Stigma (Paperback)

2009-12-07T13:05:00.005+01:00

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Homosexuality-Challenging-Stigma-Paul-Bartolo/dp/9993262242

Out of the depths of a nation that is traditionally rooted in religion and patriarchy, emerges a book that raises awareness of the plight of the Queer (gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered) community in Malta. Homosexuality: Challenging the Stigma by Bartolo and Borg (2003) examines the life of the Maltese Homosexual, contextualized against modern Western theories, discoveries and trends, in hopes of identifying the experiences and life of the Maltese Queer, and its similarities and differences from European counterparts. This review aims to critically analyze these contents and extend further notions of development that could contribute to future directions, discoveries and assertions. The author breaks these down into three components: compromising insider/outsider status in Maltese Queerness, the essential role of women and reconciliation efforts to the apparent oppressions described in the book. As a gay Maltese-Canadian educator/researcher, the author knows that writing about Queer struggles, challenges and livelihoods can be a complex task. Often there are many types of pressures that contribute to "boxing" the homosexual, into capitalist-based identity groups that determines right/wrong. This renders him/her without options and surviving through essential living to hide/hiding to live strategies. At times, it takes the heterosexual to defend/speak for/raise awareness of Queer issues. This books works well in this regard, as well as providing a concise historical overview of homosexuality. However, the identity of the authors asserts an insider/outsider binary that can be seen as positive step (heterosexual researchers speaking out in solidarity), yet could also disengage the audience (heterosexual researchers unknown of the lived experiences of Queers). "Coming out" does not simply mean telling the family, "I'm gay." It has transcended boundaries of sexual identity, and can now refer to revealing one's self in order to contextualize the insider/outsider status. While reading from heterosexual authors about Queerness does hold some value, Queer people needs to know their background so that they can relate to the author on a personal and/or professional level. There are elements of the being Queer, which are similar to being black, disabled, a woman, poor and young, that need the personal connection that only a fellow Queer person can speak to. It is important to encourage more Queer people to speak out of their experiences, so that these unspoken elements can become agents of change. For example, in rural Canada, where homophobia is still a social disease, a conference on Queer Issues in Education (University of Saskatchewan) uses recorded voices to share these stories. In liberal Brighton, United Kingdom, gay men still explore their identity through masks and storytelling. Speaking out does not mean coming out. Rather, it is coming out, through different powerful methods, that produces speaking out against existing structures that continue to promote the "heterosexual is normal/homosexual is evil" discourse. This question is similar to other marginalized people, especially women. In the book, Homosexuality: Challenging the Stigma, the voice of women, in particular Maltese Lesbians, are undernourished. While this is common for most cultures where patriarchy remains dominant, lessons learned from other Queer communities remark that the Lesbian community needs to be included in everything, or risk separation from the Gay male/Bisexual communities. Now, in certain circles, Lesbians do not welcome "outsiders" and maintains a "Lesbian Only" club. Since this book does not carry much on Lesbian literature/poetry/narratives, or many female authors, this book risks falling into the Gay male domain, despite its inclusive aim. The Lesbian community needs to be integrated into the Maltese Queer movement/ideology to ensure an equal representative change and a definitive force of solidarity. Solidarity can be an act/belief/thought that aims to liberate/develop another person or another person's community to promote social justice for all. For example, the author highlight the plight of women and racial minorities, appreciating their struggle as oppressed people. Acting out of solidarity is not an expression of pity, but out of a common interest achieve a fair and just world. This book carries research and stories that are written out of solidarity for Queer people, and it presents itself well in this regard. Solidarity, in Peace Education, is viewed as a bridge for reconciliation and social healing. Queers feel rage, just as another marginalized group of people, towards their oppressors (non-Queer people) over actions/beliefs that promote intolerance and social isolation. However, acting/believing out of solidarity re-shapes the homo-hetero relationship in order to establish a more positive and constructive force to confront dominating and controlling structures. Solidarity could shape itself out of community conferences (such as the one that lead to the publication of this book), policy changes, support groups, and training on Queer issues. However, Queer citizens must be at the forefront, and in control at the whole time, or else the cycle of dominance continues. Further editions could explore the outcome of these initiatives, and inclusive of more Maltese Queer (including transgendered) experiences and expressions. This book puts the Maltese Queer on the right path, and hopefully, it will be Queer citizens themselves that will continue to steer the future directions of peace building, equality and mutual respect.

P. Attard's Note:

This also book contains a paper by Rev. Dr Renè Camilleri:

"Creating Identities: Beyond the Hermeneutic of Suspicion", published in: Homosexuality. Challenging the Stigma (Edd. Paul A. Bartolo & Mark G. Borg), Malta: Interprint Ltd 2003.

Times: National sexual health policy

2009-12-06T15:36:00.003+01:00

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091206/letters/national-sexual-health-policy

Sunday, 6th December 2009 by Kevin Papagiorcopulo, Communications officer, Archdiocese of Malta, Floriana

With regard to the report 'Malta burying head in sand on sexual health' (The Sunday Times, November 29), I would like to make the following comments.

At just 24 hours' notice, WHO adviser John Richens asked to meet the Archbishop for a private visit. Time was made in the Archbishop's tight schedule for a 30-minute meeting at 7.45 a.m. Dr Richens was accompanied by an official from the Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Department.

During the conversation, the Archbishop asked Dr Richens regarding a sexual activity questionnaire given to schoolchildren: "Does the Catholic Church, and for that matter, any other organisation, have a right to its own ethos when educating children of parents who freely opt to send their children to Catholic schools?"

The Church and Health Department representatives have reached an agreement about this questionnaire.

As regards 'prevention' campaigns, the Archbishop asked Dr Richens about results of similar campaigns that have already been carried out in other countries. Referring to results in the UK, Dr Richens said the campaign had not been successful and that both sexually-transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancies were on the increase.

Dr Richens mentioned the Netherlands as an example where the campaign was deemed successful with regard to teenage pregnancies.

Actual percentages were not mentioned, but the Archbishop asked whether teenage abortions were also taken into account when presenting percentages on teenage pregnancies. Dr Richens promised he would send information on this issue.

The Archbishop said that the Church has been, and would continue, providing support to alleviate this problem through its teachings, and by campaigning against promiscuity and in favour of marital faithfulness and a holistic commitment in sexual relationships.

The Archbishop mentioned that, unfortunately, youngsters have to try to implement these values despite being continuously bombarded by completely different ideas and messages on sexuality and sexual activity.

The Archbishop apologised for the shortness of the meeting and told Dr Richens he would be only too glad to meet for another, longer meeting when Dr Richens was back on the island.

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

Telegraph: Gays and transsexuals 'will never go to Heaven', cardinal says

2009-12-03T14:27:00.002+01:00

The Roman Catholic Church still regards homosexuality as an “insult to God” and homosexuals and transsexuals will never go to Heaven, a leading cardinal said on Wednesday, prompting a rebuke from the Vatican.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/6711601/Gays--and-transsexuals-will-never-go-to-Heaven-cardinal-says.html

03 Dec 2009 By Nick Squires in Perugia

"Transsexuals and homosexuals will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven and it is not me who says this, but Saint Paul," said Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, 76.

In remarks which outraged gay rights groups, he claimed that people were not born gay, but chose to embrace homosexuality of their own free will.

"People are not born homosexual, they become homosexual, for different reasons: education issues or because they did not develop their own identity during adolescence.

"Perhaps they aren't guilty but by acting against the dignity of the body they will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven," said Cardinal Barragan, who recently retired as head of the Vatican's Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers but still holds influential positions on several Church committees.

He quoted a passage from Paul's epistle to the Romans which speaks of "men committing indecent acts with other men".

"Homosexuality is therefore a sin, but this does not justify any form of discrimination. God alone has the right to judge," the cardinal said. "We on earth cannot condemn, and as human beings we all have the same rights."

But the Vatican distanced itself from the cardinal's comments in a statement that was highly unusual because it indirectly criticised a top Church official.

Father Federico Lombardi, a Vatican spokesman, said theconservative website on which the cardinal made his comments should not be considered an authority on Catholic thinking “on complex and delicate issues such as homosexuality”.

Father Lombardi quoted from the official Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, which says homosexual acts are a “disorder” but acknowledges that many people have “innate homosexual tendencies” and should be treated with respect and not be subject to discrimination.

The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual acts are sinful but homosexuality in itself is not.

An Italian gay rights group, Arcigay, condemned his comments and put out a statement in which it said: "It's true, we won't ever get into your heaven, which is a murky and unjust place".

It said the cardinal's remarks risked legitimising anti-gay discrimination and even violence. There has been a spate of attacks against gay men in Italy in recent months, from Rome to Milan.

Times: AIDS vigil

2009-12-02T21:58:00.001+01:00

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091201/local/aids-vigil

Tuesday, 1st December 2009

Photo: Chris Sant Fournier.

Activists lit candles to form the AIDS-awareness red ribbon in Valletta last night during a vigil to mark World AIDS Day today. The vigil was organised by the Malta Medical Student's Association, with the participation of the Malta Gay Rights Movement.

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]

Peter Tatchell: World Aids Day - End the gay blood ban

2009-12-02T04:48:00.001+01:00

http://www.petertatchell.net/blood%20ban%20on%20gays/wad-end-the-gay-blood-ban.html
London – 30 November 2009

Terrence Higgins Trust and Gay Men Fighting Aids urged to support change
“Ban reflects stererotyped, irrational, bigoted and unscientific fears”

“The blanket, lifetime ban on gay and bisexual men donating blood is based on stererotyped, irrational, unscientific and homophobic assumptions,” said human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights group OutRage!

He was speaking to coincide with World Aids Day, Tuesday I December.

An outline of Mr Tatchell’s new draft policy to ease restrictions on blood donations follows below.

“In contrast to the intransigence of the National Blood Service, the Anthony Nolan Trust has lifted its automatic ban on all donations from gay and bisexual men,” Mr Tatchell added.

“The blood service is currently appealing for donors, ahead of the winter flu season. Some of the potential shortfall in the blood supply could be met if the total ban on gay and bisexual donors was lifted.

“In response to protests and criticisms. the government’s Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs (SaBTO) is currently undertaking a review of whether the comprehensive ban should remain.

“The gay-led charities, Terrence Higgins Trust and Gay Men Fighting Aids, have previously suppprted the ban. THT contiunues to do so. GMFA is expected to soon reconsider its policy.

“We hope that THT and GMFA will soon join the campaign by OutRage!, the National Aids Trust and the National Union of Students to ensure that this sweeping ban is overturned.

“The lifetime ban is backed by the government, which claims to oppose homophobic discrimination. It is based on the stererotyped, irrational, bigoted and unscientific presumption that the blood of every man who has had oral or anal sex with another man – even just once 40 years ago with a condom – is unsafe. This is nonsense.

“The truth is that most gay and bisexual men do not have HIV and will never have HIV. Their blood is safe to donate.

“Among those prohibited from donating blood are: gay couples in life-long monogamous relationships, celibate gay and bisexual men, heterosexual men who experimented once with their schoolmates, and males who last had gay sex in the 1960s – over a decade before the HIV pandemic began. Even if men from these groups test HIV-negative, they are banned for life from donating blood. This policy is madness.

“The priority must be to protect the blood supply from infection with HIV. But this can be achieved without a universal ban on all gay and bisexual men.

“Other countries have ditched their lifetime exclusion, including New Zealand, Spain, Italy, Japan and Australia. They allow some gay and bisexual men to donate blood, in certain cirumstances.

“Since Spain and Italy ended their total gay ban, the number of HIV infections from contaminated blood donations has fallen. This seems to be because they eased the restrictions and, at the same time, educated the gay community about the new policy. Gay donors responded with care and responsibility.

DRAFT NEW POLICY re gay and bisexual blood donors

“The National Blood Service should replace the lifetime ban with more narrow restrictions focused on risky gay and bisexual donors. This change of policy should go hand-in-hand with a “Safe Blood” education campaign targeted at the LGBT community, to ensure that no one donates blood if they are at risk of HIV and other blood-borne infections.

“The only men who should be definitely excluded as donors are those who have had oral or anal sex with a man without a condom in the previous six months and those who have a history of unsafe sex. Most other gay and bisexual men should be accepted as donors, providing their blood tests HIV-negative.

“If the blood service wanted to be ultra cautious, it could exclude all male donors who have had oral or anal sex with a man in the last month and do both a HIV antibody test and a HIV antigen test on all those who have had oral or anal sex in the preceding six months. This would guarantee that the donated blood posed no risk to its recipients.

“This change of policy would not endanger the blood supply. With these provisos, the blood donated would be safe,” said Mr Tatchell.

It-Torċa: Il-GWU f’ħidma favur il-ħaddiema LGBT

2009-12-01T19:03:00.001+01:00

[Dan l-artiklu mhux fuq is-sit tat-Torċa s'issa.]
29.11.9

Il-pożizzjoni meħuda mill-General Workers’ Union għall-ħarsien tad-drittijiet ta’ persuni liżbjani, gay, bisesswali u transgender jidher li aktar ma’ jgħaddi żmien qiegħda tkabbar l-għarfien li l-Union hija l-organizzazzjoni li b’mod tanġibli qiegħda taħdem f’dan il-qasam. Il-komunità LGBT f’Malta kellha reazzjoni pożittiva ħafna speċjalment dawk il-ħaddiema li qiegħdin isofru fuq il-post tax-xogħol minħabba l-orjentazzjoni sesswali tagħhom.

Mistoqsi mit-TORĊA dwar ħidmet il-GWU f’dan il-qasam id-Deputat Segretarju Ġenerali Gejtu Mercieca qal li l-Union qatt ma qagħdet lura milli tiddiskuti b’mod miftuħ temi soċjali jaħarqu, bħal mhuma dawk li jolqtu l-liżbjani, gays, bisesswali u transgender (LGBT):

“Il GWU qatt ma beżgħet tindirizza dawn it-tip ta’ temi, l aktar meta dawn ikun hemm min jipprova li jew ma jtihomx l importanza meħtieġa, inkella jaħbihom qishom ma jeżitux. Wieħed mill-ogħla prinċipji fundamentali huwa li kull persuna titwieled ħielsa bl-istess drittijiet u dinjità. Dan il-principju universali intrinsikament ifisser li ħadd m’għandu jsofri diskriminazzjoni, la fis-soċjetà u wisq anqas fuq il-post tax-xogħol, minħabba sess jew orjentazzjoni sesswali”

Huwa tenna li dwar il-ħtieġi tal-persuni LGBT il-Konfederazzjoni Ewropea tat-Trade Unions (ETUC) xhur ilu organizzat konferenza dwar id-drittijiet ta’ dawn il-persuni. Fost il-punti li ħarġu minn dik il-konferenza, li kienu diversi, hemm il-ħtieġa ta’ għarfien ikbar għar-realtajiet li jgħixu dawn il-persuni u li d-drittijiet tagħhom huma wkoll temi trejdunjonistiċi: “L-impenn tredjunjonistiku preżenti tagħna bħala GWU mandakollu ma jeħlisniex mill-fatt li sa ftit tas-snin ilu ma konniex nagħtu kas tad-drittijiet u r-realtajiet li jgħixu fihom il-persuni li huma LGBT.”

Mercieca qal li fir-realtà f’pajjiżna persuni b’orjentazzjoni sesswali għadhom mhux biss ikunu diskriminati iżda anki żufjettati u abbużati verbalment u fiżikament fuq il-postijiet tax-xogħol u anki fil-ħajja soċjali tagħhom. Dan il-fatt qed iwassal ukoll biex persuni b’orjentazzjoni sesswali differenti jibżgħu jiżvelaw il-veru identità sesswali tagħhom: “Ċirkustanza li twassal ukoll għal ansjetà bla ħtieġa u biex persuni jħossuhom aborriti mis-soċjetà. Huwa fatt ukoll li persuni b’orjentazzjoni sesswali differenti għadhom ikunu mċaħħda mid-drittijiet li jgawdu persuni oħra meqjusa li jikkonformaw man-normi stabbiliti.”

Hu f’dan l-ambitu li l-GWU ħadet ir-responsabilità u ħarġet il-Policy Paper tagħha fuq dawn il-persuni u anki ħolqot working group għaliex temmen li dawn il-persuni għandhom bżonn leħen aktar b’saħħtu biex iwasslilhom dawk id-drittijiet fundamentali li għandu jkollhom. Fil-ġimgħa li għaddiet il-GWU kienet mistiedna mill-Ministry of Integration and Gender Equality tal-Iżvezja għall-konferenza fuq din it-tema fejn fiha saret prezentazzjoni tal-policy paper tagħha fuq il-persuni LGBT. Dan juri kemm hu importanti li dawn il-persuni joħorġu fil-beraħ u jfittxu l-wens tal-GWU fl-interess tagħhom.

Min-naħa tiegħu Jeremy Camilleri - assistent segretarju taqsima gvern u entitajiet pubbliċi u preżentament membru fil-kumitat LGBT tal-GWU għall-mistoqsijiet tat-TORĊA qal li jaħseb li l-isfida ewlenija għal dawn il-persuni hija dik li jkunu lesti jgħelbu l-istigma u jneħħu l-biżgħa li qiegħdin iħossu meta jiġu biex jitkellmu dwar il-problemi li jiffaċċjaw ta’ kuljum fid-dinja tax-xogħol: “F’soċjetà li fiha LGBT isofru bullying, harrasement u xi minn daqqiet, anki nuqqas ta’ impjieg fuq bażi regolari minħabba l-orjentazzjoni sesswali tagħhom, il-fatt li dawn ma tantx jitkellmu jew jirraportaw dan l-aġir iqajjem ħafna mistoqsijiet.”

Huwa qal li l-GWU saħħet ix-xogħol tagħha f’dan il-qasam billi nehdiet policy paper li tati direzzjoni ċara u b’saħħitha ta’ fejn, u kif il-Union trid timxi ‘l quddiem. Ta’ min jgħid li din il-policy paper saret wara laqgħat ta’ konsultazzjoni m’għaqdiet bħal Malta Gay Rights Movement (MGRM) fuq bażi lokali kif ukoll l-International Gay & Lesbian Association (ILGA) fuq bażi Ewropea. Xhieda ta’ dan kien il-mod ta kif kienet milqugħa din il-policy paper minn numru ta’ Unions u għaqdiet Ewropej, meta din kienet ippreżentata fi Stokkolma waqt equality summit organizzat mill-EU.

Camilleri tenna li l-ħsieb huwa li jkun hemm numru ta’ ħaddiema LGBT li huma fi ħdan il-Union: “Bħalissa, l-isforzi li qiegħdin isiru min-naħa tagħna biex imexxu ‘l quddiem il-kawza ta’ nies LGBT, hija evidenti kemm lokalment, kif ukoll b’mod aktar wiesa barra minn xtutna, biex nieħdu l-esperjenzi ta’ pajjiżi oħra, u nimxu fuq it-tajjeb tagħhom. Iżda, irridu nammettu wkoll, li l-aħjar nies biex jippreżentaw il-problemi huma l-istess nies li jesperjenzawhom fuq bażi regolari. Għaldaqstant, ikun għaqli li jkollna numru ta’ LGBT fostna, biex aħna stess, bħala Union, nitghallmu mill-esperjenzi tagħhom, u b’hekk, inkun aktar faċli għall-GWU biex tuża s-saħħa kollha li għandha ħalli jitwaqqaf l-aġir diskriminatorju fil-konfront tagħhom fid-dinja tax-xogħol jitwaqqaf minnufih. Jekk nies LGBT ikomplu jingħalqu fihom infushom, l-integrazzjoni tagħhom tagħhom fid-dinja tax-xogħol bħala ‘equal partners’ se tkompli tkun posposta.” Huwa tenna li s-snin kollha ta’ diskriminazzjoni istituzzjonalizzata f’kull aspett tas-soċjetà intolleranti, ħallew l-effett tagħhom: “ħafna minn nies LGBT donnhom daħħlu f’qoxra u jfittxu kenn fl-anonimità. Dan minħabba li jibżgħu li jekk jitkellmu, jew ikunu rredikolati jew is-sitwazzjoni tagħhom tmur għall-agħar.”

Camilleri isostni li: “Dan m’għandu jkun qatt. Persuna, tkun xi tkun l-orjentazzjoni sesswali tagħha għanda titkellem għad-drittijiet tagħha mingħajr biża’ ta’ xejn. Bħala GWU għalhekk qiegħdin iniedu dawn l-inizjattivi, biex noffru ħajt għal-kenn.”

MaltaToday: The power of the throne [Interview with the new PN's President]

2009-12-01T18:10:00.004+01:00

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/11/29/interview.html

29.11.9 [Excerpt of the interview. Click on the hyperlink above to read the complete article.]

Paula Mifsud Bonnici’s ambitious pursuit of a political career recently landed her the position of President of the PN General Council, after garnering almost double of Ian Castaldi Paris’ votes. But has she just earned herself a fancy title? Interview by DAVID DARMANIN

...

In Gonzi’s counter reply to the 2010 budget speech, he clearly included separated couples as the “vulnerable in society”. As the time may be ripe for the PN dignitaries to take the bull by its horns on divorce, the subject risks becoming an issue come the next general elections. Mifsud Bonnici tries to find the middle ground with her position on divorce. Will voters and PN grassroots buy it?

“I agree that one must take into account present circumstances. However, at the end of the day we must not forget our principles. We must also remember that, as a nation, we are mostly Roman Catholics. At the same time, we must realise that the situation for separated couples is difficult but we should not think of divorce as the solution.

“We need to be conscious of the pain some people are going through by creating the proper mechanisms. If there is a system that does not work, we need to improve it. There is nothing wrong in people getting remarried after separating. Let us not forget that annulment is an option that both the church and the state provide for. There is obviously room for improvement in the practicality of it. There is a huge backlog for instance, and I do not think it is fair for couples to pass through the ordeal of waiting for so long after they would have just passed through another ordeal while separating.

“There are grounds in annulment which directly relate to marriage situations. For example: one of the grounds for annulment is the lack of capability to assume marriage responsibility, meaning that if your husband returns home every night at 3am, it could be already considered as one of the grounds for annulment. This is not to say that sometimes, the interpretation of annulment laws might be too strict. In any case, I do not feel that divorce should be the solution – as we would be risking a situation where couples enter marriages with the idea that the tie can be dissolved. Annulment, on the other hand, proves that there was never a marriage.
“However, there must be a collective effort to ensure that marriages do not break down. Wider discussion will surely have to take place sooner or later.”

The PL has recently created a committee dedicated entirely to the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) community. In contrast, the Malta Gay Rights Movement had said that PN was the least party inclined to legislate in favour of gay minorities: such as equal access to goods and services or kinship rights, among others.

“The PN is already discussing this issue internally. We did not form a committee, but this does not mean that there is no discussion. I disagree with the idea that the PN is the least party inclined to favour gay minorities. We might need to be more open in our discussions – as well as including the ideas of all concerned, including minorities. This would be very healthy.”

...

[Nota minn P. Attard: Kemm ħa ddumu tiddiskutu?! Ilkom aktar minn 10 snin twegħdu drittijiet għal min jikkoabita]

MaltaToday: When it’s OK to vilify gay men and lesbians

2009-12-01T18:09:00.000+01:00

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/11/29/joseph.html

29.11.9 by Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

Broadly speaking, anti-vilification legislation creates civil offences and is designed to prohibit public acts of vilification, verbal abuse and hatred on a range of grounds including race, religion, politics and sexual orientation. Criminal proscriptions often require the perpetrator to have threatened or incited others to threaten physical harm to a person or their property.
Anti-vilification legislation usually carries a number of exemptions. Exempted conduct may include the fair reporting of a public act of vilification, communications which attract absolute privilege such as proceedings in a parliament, and acts done reasonably and in good faith for academic, artistic, scientific or research purposes, or any other purpose in the public interest, including discussion about any matter or act. Hence, a claim by Bishop Emeritus John Shelby Spong that St Paul was homosexual or an assertion by the late Yale University professor John Boswell that Saints Serge and Bacchus were “a gay couple” is unlikely to be deemed an act of vilification.
More often than not, the primary (but not sole) impetus for the introduction of anti-vilification legislation is the protection of vulnerable minority groups, but also members of a majority (although some writers doubt the significance of these provisions, given that such majorities often have the back up of society, if not governmental and non-governmental instrumentalities).
By contrast, anti-vilification measures found in Sections 163-165 of Malta’s Criminal Code seek, first, to consolidate what is termed the Roman Catholic religion as the dominant church and only religion in Malta, and, secondly, to ridicule other creeds by designating them as cults but not all cults, mind you, only those that are “tolerated by law”. I say the only religion because in Section 163 of the Code all other religions are summarily dismissed as ‘cults’ (intended to hurt and belittle persons with religious beliefs and practices other than those of the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion). Where protection extends to “other religions”, as in Section 165 of the Code, that protection is limited to the safeguarding of the conduct of religious services.
More disturbingly is the use of the phrase “tolerated by law”. Persons of other religious belief want more than be tolerated by law. They want to be fully accepted by the law and to be treated equally before the law. That persons found guilty of vilifying the Roman Catholic religion attract a higher term of imprisonment than those that vilify cults is one example of how Maltese law plainly discriminates against persons on account of their religious beliefs and practices.
And who the hell does the Maltese government think it is to ‘tolerate’ cults when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in Article 18, sets out that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion which right includes freedom to change one’s religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest one’s religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Elements of offence
The elements of the offence in section 163 of the Criminal Code can be summarised as follows: a person vilifies the Roman Catholic Apostolic Religion, including its ministers or anything which forms the object of or is consecrated to or is necessarily destined for Roman Catholic worship, when he or she does so in public, by words, gestures, written matter, whether printed or not, or pictures.
Section 163 appears to go well beyond what is reasonable and normally contemplated by anti-vilification laws. It covers not only the vilification of individuals (Roman Catholics) but also their religion and their Church. It probably also encompasses the vilification of, say, a minister of the Roman Catholic religion even when the act of vilification has no link with the minister’s religious beliefs and practices. What if a person vilifies a priest whose private life is an affront to what the Roman Catholic religion teaches? Say a paedophile priest? Do not these provisions in the Criminal Code promote the cover up of sexual offences by priests? And what is to be understood by the word ‘public’, particularly in a country with as high a population density as is Malta?
Section 164 of the Criminal Code is concerned with ‘other cults’: “Whosoever commits any of the acts referred to in the last preceding article against any cult tolerated by law, shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment for a term from one to three months.”
I wonder what procedure is in place for the government of Malta to tolerate other cults and which cults have been tolerated! Malta’s Constitution was withdrawn in 1933 as Fascist Italy increased its influence over the island when Malta reverted to a Crown Colony status. It appears that these anti-vilification measures were introduced by the Maltese parliament in the same year probably to consolidate not only the Roman Catholic faith, but also fascism, with whom this Roman Catholic faith was believed to have had an alliance.
Do such provisions, I wonder, comply with not only international human rights jurisprudence but Malta’s own Constitution? What about the rights to freedom of opinion and expression that are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? What about exempting acts done reasonably and in good faith for academic, artistic, scientific or research purposes, or any other purpose in the public interest, including discussion about any matter or act?

Malta, today
Sections 163-165 of the Code showcase Malta as a closed society, one that gazes down its own navel. The Maltese have grown tired of legislation that does not reflect the world they live in and of politicians who are too lazy to update the many laws that predate the Second World War let alone the establishment of the United Nations (1945) and Malta entry into the European Union.
The recent spate of charges against persons purportedly vilifying the Roman Catholic religion remind us that these provisions are anything but a dead letter of the law. Imagine dressing up as a priest, a bishop, an archbishop or even a pope, finding yourself being hurled before a court of law and walking away with a criminal record! What these provisions show is that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. The Maltese parliament has a duty to include identical provisions that protect not only gay men and lesbians but also the gay and lesbian movement from vilification. The width and breath of such legislation should mirror that which protects the Roman Catholic religion from vilification. Nothing less.
In the past, the Church called on the government and expected it to enforce its beliefs and practices on Maltese (even under the threat of interdict). The ‘I scratch your back, you scratch mine’ attitude is slowly crumbling. No future government can afford to embark on a band-aid review to the law. What is required is a revision of all laws in their entirety, including the write up of another Constitution for Malta, one that genuinely protects the rights of all Maltese, irrespective of their gender, their politics, their religion, their marital status and their sexual orientation (to mention but a few). Such a Constitution should make no reference to any God or any religion because we all know that theists take unfair advantage of such provisions. It should be truly secular Constitution! A true masterpiece!

Joseph Carmel Chetcuti is the author of Il-Ktieb Roza: Dnub, Dizordni u Delitt (1997) and Queer Mediterranean Memories (2009), and is a barrister in Victoria (Australia).

RTK: Bla Kantunieri: Kummenti fuq l-Imam el Sadi

2009-11-30T15:53:00.008+01:00

Programm tar-Radju imxandar fit-30 ta' Novembru 2009 f' 12:20 u fit-20:05

fuq ir-Radju tal-Knisja (RTK) 103Mhz FM

minn Dr Mario Tabone Vassallo MD, FRCSEdin., FRCSEng., FFAEM.

Tista' tisma' recording ta' dan il-programm hawn [mur 17:30] bħala reazzjoni għall-kummenti ta' l-Imam f"Malta Muhammed El Sadi f' BondiPlus.

---

Ara Ukoll:

Times: Upholding spiritual and moral values

Times: How the Imam stole my hands

PRESS RELEASE: Call to the Imam to apologise to the Maltese Gay and Lesbian Community - AD and the PL LGBT Network should issue strong statements

Liverpool Stanley Street Homophobic Attack Leaves Victim Fighting For His Life

Guardian: Gay Argentine couple's wedding plans divide an entire continent

2009-11-29T17:54:00.005+01:00

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/29/latin-america-first-gay-wedding

Two Argentinians will this week become the first gay couple in Latin America to get married, following a three-year campaign that pitted politician against politician, overturned laws and angered millions of Catholics

Annie Kelly

The Observer, Sunday 29 November 2009

Alex Freyre and partner Jose Maria Di Bello, Latin America's first same-sex couple to be granted a marriage licence Photograph: Marcos Brindicci/Reuters

The Beruti register office in the Palermo district of Buenos Aires will never have witnessed a marriage like it. On Tuesday, Alex Freyre and José María Di Bello, who met three years ago at a conference on HIV, will make history and divide a continent as they become Latin America's first gay married couple.

The ceremony will be a tribute to their determination as well as their love for each other, after a bitter three-year campaign which has divided a city, outraged Argentina's powerful Roman Catholic church and overturned the constitution.

Freyre and Di Bello's forthcoming nuptials have been debated on television, in churches and on the street. Hostile posters can be found on billboards across the city. But, in Di Bello's words, nothing can now prevent him and his partner becoming "husband and husband".

Not surprisingly, the marriage is already being hailed by equality activists as a significant triumph against the odds in a traditionally macho society. Argentina – and Latin America in general – is not known for a tolerance of sexual diversity, and violence against gays is an everyday occurrence.

"This marriage is bigger than José María and I," Freyre told theObserver. "It is a victory for all who face prejudice and discrimination across Latin America and the Caribbean. It is proof that at last the grip of the Catholic church is slipping across Latin America, the system that has kept gay communities silent and fearful is crumbling. What is happening on Tuesday is a strike against those attitudes that have repressed sexual rights across this continent for too long."

The most controversial marriage in Argentina's history became possible when a city court judge ruled that it was unconstitutional for civil law to stipulate that a marriage can exist only between a man and a woman. The marriage licence was granted on 16 November. Since then, the couple and their lawyers have come under virulent attack from church leaders, who have warned that the marriage could act as the catalyst for the swift decline of the continent's traditional family values.

The archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Bergoglio, has publicly lashed out at the city's mayor, Mauricio Macri, who decided not to lodge an appeal against the judge's decision to grant the marriage licence. An appeal by the city government against the judge's ruling would, in effect, have overturned the judge's decision and stopped the licence being granted. Bergoglio said that, in failing to act, Macri had "gravely failed" at his task of governing.

For his part, Macri issued a statement saying that he had gone through "an important internal debate", adding: "We have to live with and accept this reality: the world is moving in this direction." He said government officials should "safeguard the right of each person to freely choose with whom they want to form a couple and be happy".

Anti-Macri posters showing two men kissing and asking "Did you vote Macri for this?" have been plastered across Buenos Aires in protest at the marriage.

Last week, as media interest in the marriage reached fever pitch, Freyre and Di Bello spent their last days as single men crisscrossing Buenos Aires from TV studio to radio station. "It's become so much bigger than us that I forget that I'm actually getting married and we haven't even arranged anything for the wedding," said Freyre.

Freyre and Di Bello, both long-term activists and HIV and equality rights campaigners, are now offering their legal team to other couples who want to win the right to marry through city courts. "What can't happen is that this becomes a one-off," said Freyre. "We may have won our battle, but we don't want to be the exception."

Campaigners are now hoping that gay and lesbian couples in other cities will extend the fight to outside the capital. Claudio Rosso, a 32-year-old psychoanalyst from the city of Rosario, believes that the marriage will send a strong message that the law is finally supporting the rights of gay people across the country. "This can change the way the gay community perceives itself," said Rosso. "It will take time for this to have an impact outside of Buenos Aires, but for the gay community in Argentina the feeling that you have the law on your side creates a feeling of positivity and optimism that things can change."

Although the new judicial ruling sets no precedent beyond this case, lawyers for the couple hope the ruling will increase pressure on lawmakers to debate a gay marriage bill currently deadlocked in Congress.

"This is just one marriage in one city in Latin America, we are very far away from this right being extended across the country, let alone the continent," said Analia Mariel Mas, the lead lawyer working with the couple.

"Recently, we travelled with a delegation of equality rights campaigners to the north of the country, and had people waving crucifixes at us as if they were seeing Satan in human form. So there needs to be a change to the national legislation to force through changes and uphold our constitutional rights. Change won't happen if we try to do this case by case."

No country in Latin America allows gay marriage, although several cities in Mexico and Uruguay have followed Buenos Aires by allowing same-sex civil unions, which grant some of the rights accorded to married heterosexual couples. Earlier this year, Freyre and Di Bello rejected offers of a civil union, arguing that only marriage would give them the same legal rights and status in the eyes of the law. "We are citizens, so we are asserting our rights as citizens," said Freyre. "We have the right to the same legal status in the eyes of the law and deserve to be given the same legal protection as heterosexual couples."

Changing articles in Argentina's civil code to allow same-sex marriage has support among deputies in President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's ruling Peronist party, although the president herself has yet to take a stand.

The city is expecting large crowds to gather outside the register office on Tuesday, where plasma screens will broadcast the marriage ceremony. Security will be tight to deal with protesters.

In the cafes and bars of Buenos Aires, the marriage of Di Bello and Freyre has become a constant topic of conversation. The city is considered one of Latin America's "gay-friendly" cities and was the first place there to allow same-sex civil unions in 2002. But, for some, gay marriage is still a step too far.

On a corner in Palermo, close to where the wedding will take place, Bruno Cabral, a 42-year old civil engineer, sent an approving nod in the direction of a bank of anti-Macri posters. The marriage, he said, was an "abomination".

"Buenos Aires used to be a city which respected family, which respected traditional ways of life, but now look at what is happening, they are making mockery of marriage," he said. "This isn't a city I recognise any more."

Others see the marriage as a symbol of change for Argentina and for the continent. The wedding has received general support from the mainstream press, with many people expressing their approval of Freyre and Di Bello's right to marry.

"To me this marriage is perfect," said Cecilia Quiles, a 26-year-old office manager. "It is only changes like this which will move us to a place where we are all respecting each other. Those who call this marriage unnatural or wrong are living in the past. We are moving on."

Freyre and Di Bello say they will be relieved when the spotlight moves elsewhere after Tuesday's ceremony. "We have people calling us every day saying we are their heroes, people we don't know crying on the phone saying that Tuesday will be the best day of their life," said Freyre. "But we won't want to be heroes, all we wanted to do was get married. And now we've brought a little rainbow to Latin America, it's time for others to take up the banner as well and make us not the exception but the rule."

Independent: A letter to Mark Montebello OP

2009-11-29T17:17:00.000+01:00

http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=97973
29.11.9? by Martin Bugeja

If it’s any consolation, your Maker made certain that you appeared on this earth in the 20th century and not the 15th. For, as surely as night follows day, your fellow Dominican Tomas de Torquemada OP would have had you consigned to the flames ages ago, as soon as you started to open your mouth to condemn the many facets of hypocrisy that stand out a mile in this powerful Maltese branch of the Roman Catholic Church, headed by holier-than-thou arch-conservatives who believe that they have a monopoly on the truth – and anyone else daring to speak their mind is sent to Coventry in subtle or not so subtle ways.

You were right of course. And you had the guts to say it out loud. Any male or female member of the local clergy engaging in the physical or sexual abuse of children needn’t worry about ending up in Corradino for a spell. They just once in a blue moon might end up being arraigned... but that’s a different story, as you well know. Such a fate is only reserved for Maltese abusers who don’t wear dog collars around their necks or veils over their heads. To hell with those shattered innocent young lives!

What’s important is that no whiff of scandal is allowed to waft its way into the consciences of those members of the faithful who can find it within themselves to call a spade a spade. Did you by any chance read last Friday’s (27 November 2009) article in The Guardian on the devastating report pertaining to the sexual and physical abuse of children by certain members of the Irish clergy from 1975 to 2004? The article quotes this salient piece from the three-volume report: “The maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church and the preservation of its assets was more important than justice for the victims”.

Regarding your recent pronouncements on the public display of that gibbet upon which Jesus paid the ultimate price for speaking His mind, I would like to inform your patronising superiors that I, Martin Bugeja can think for myself – thank you very much – and consequently did not take offence at them.

On the contrary, I wholeheartedly agree with all that you said and add that certain miscarriages of justice have occurred in courtrooms adorned with the Cross. You’re so right. It’s not displaying it, wearing it, kissing it, kneeling before it or boasting of your love for it that counts. That’s easy stuff! What the Living Image on it wants us to do is live by it. That’s the hard part, as we all know.

Like yourself, I differentiate between Jesus Christ and certain celibate ruling members of His Church that I liken to salt of the earth that has lost its flavour. In fact I don’t consider myself a Catholic any more but a person trying, succeeding and failing to live according to the words of Jesus Christ.

And I certainly won’t be waving any yellow and white flags around, come April 2010. I think I’ll pack my bags for that weekend and fly to a super – secular – country like Holland, where divorce and same-sex marriages are allowed, and ask a few of its citizens if they know anything about loving their neighbour.

[P. Attard's Note: Pope Benedict XVI will visit Malta between 17 and 18 April 2010.]

Times: Malta 'burying head in sand' on sexual health

2009-11-29T16:58:00.005+01:00

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091129/local/malta-burying-head-in-sand-on-sexual-health

29.11.9 by Ariadne Massa

Malta is burying its head in the sand on sexual health, according to a World Health Organisation adviser who is concerned about soaring teenage pregnancies and the lack of proper sex education.

John Richens, whose recent visit to Malta was not publicised even though he was invited by the health authorities, seemed baffled that he did not manage to see a copy of the National Sexual Health Policy.

"I requested it but it was withheld from me. There was a reluctance to share the document. I don't know what the reasons for this were," he told The Sunday Times, when contacted at his office in the UK.

Dr Richens, a clinical specialist in sexually transmitted infections and HIV at the University College London who was invited to help Malta set up a sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention programme, said a national sexual health strategy "was a matter of urgency".

His visit came just weeks after the third and latest draft of the National Sexual Health Policy - which would cost €1.5 million to implement - was withdrawn from the 2010 Budget, snuffing out the possibility it would see the light of day after 10 years in the making.

Dr Richens's report on Malta, which this newspaper obtained, points out that STI prevention and control appear to be low on the political agenda as there is no published national strategy, no defined budget and a small response team.

The report also observes the "strong negative influence of the Catholic Church" to have comprehensive sexual health promotion in schools, which it says was a constant theme raised by Maltese health professionals and politicians.

Dr Richens said Malta stood out because of the large number of births to teenagers, and reports from the GU Clinic indicating condoms and contraception were being used by very few people.

According to the latest European Perinatal Health Report, Malta has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancy in the EU - 5.5 to 6.6 per cent of all pregnancies in females under 20 in the years 1999 to 2008. GU Clinic figures consistently point to a high rate of casual sex with 70 per cent of those who visit the clinic admitting to never using a condom.

Dr Richens, who is working with WHO to roll out a global strategy for the prevention and control of STIs, said: "It's shocking that Malta has been trying to get it (the sexual health policy) published for 10 years... That's a concern."

He is also worried about the lack of cooperation from Church schools' in connection with surveys of health behaviour of schoolchildren (HBSC).

Three years ago the Curia's education secretariat had instructed Church schools not to distribute WHO's HBSC survey to Form I, III and V pupils because it disapproved of the nature of the questions about sexual relations.

While in Malta, Dr Richens met Archbishop Paul Cremona to gauge whether it would be possible to get more information about teenage sexual activity through surveys in Church schools, but he did not get far.

"He was very charming but very firm. He acknowledged it was important to have the information, but he was reluctant to say the Church would cooperate with those surveys. He accepts the problem, but does not want to get involved in finding a solution," he said.

Dr Richens believed the way forward was to provide teenagers with accessible comprehensive information that presented all the methods available to prevent infection and pregnancy.

When it was pointed out that in Malta many favoured promoting abstinence rather than safe sex, Dr Richens said this type of programme, advocated by the Church, had been used in the US, but scientific studies suggested it was not as successful in reducing teenage pregnancies.

"The comprehensive approach is what is espoused in the Netherlands and delivers excellent results. The country has the lowest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe and they have a very good programme of sex education in schools," he said.

The report's findings and recommendations

• The report highlights the failure to investigate sex workers operating from massage parlours, gentlemen's clubs and hotel bars. There is no outreach health promotion or sexual health services for these people.

• There is also no specialist health services catering specifically for the sexual health needs of young people and access to contraception for females under 18 is difficult, because it requires a parent's consent.

• A national sexual strategy for Malta is a matter of urgency.

• Funding from the government or the EU should be secured to implement the strategy.

• Laws that work against sexual health objectives, such as age of consent, and laws governing provision of contraception, have to be reviewed.

• A programme of regular surveillance of sexual behaviour and STIs among the young and high-risk groups has to be developed.

• Sexually active 16- to 18-year-olds should have improved access to long-acting removable contraception (LARC), such as the contraceptive jab or the coil.

• At least one non-Church based family planning clinic able to offer a full range of modern methods, including long-lasting birth control should be set up.

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website.]