HumanRightsRussiaPOL321

Violations of Human Rights in International Law:
The Russian Federation and the Queer Community
by
Michael “Nykolai” Blichar Jr.
International Law and Organizations
POL 321-10
Dr. Riley
Kutztown University of Pennsylvania
April 8, 2015

Blichar Jr. 1
Introduction
Human rights typically is a concept many can agree has an overall agreeable definition.
These are the rights inherent to human beings regardless of nationality, sex, race, ethnicity,
religion, the list goes on. Put more simply, human rights are those rights which are given based
on the simple fact that one is a human being. However, even though this principle is a major
cornerstone of the international community, primarily bodies like the United Nations, these
rights are violated and ignored every single day. While one can focus on issues such as race or
gender, it is important to also note one community in particular whose rights have been ignored
for so long. With the recent developments in the Russian Federation, the community in which the
focus needs to be is that of the queer community.
For the purpose of this piece, the word “queer’ is used as an umbrella term to describe
those whom identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, intersex, asexual, pansexual,
demisexual, etc. This term while historically used negatively has been reclaimed by many in the
community in recent years. With a clear definition of the community in focus, it becomes easier
to identify the very people that are being affected by the issue under investigation. This issue
stems from the recent develops in the Russian Federation with the signing of a bill on June 30,
2013 by President Vladimir Putin banning the “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations to
minors” (Grekov). Out of this law came a string of violence, heightened homophobia, and
crackdown on the rights of queer citizens in the Russian Federation. What this issue calls into
question is whether or not Russia’s new law is in fact a violation of human rights in the eyes of
international law.

Blichar Jr. 2
In order to further analyze this issue and answer whether or not Russia has indeed
violated international human rights law and discuss possible outcomes, it will first be important
to present a review of the issue at hand, discussing the development that have taken place and the
situation the “anti-gay propaganda” law has caused. Taking an understanding of that issue it will
become easier to analyze literature that other authors have presented on the issue in question and
then present findings in international human rights law as well. With that information a
discussion of the finding and literature will be essential in determining whether or not Russia
should be tried for human rights abuses against the queer community.
A Review of the Conditions of the Queer Community in Russia
In order to understand why the condition of the queer community is so important in the
Russian Federation, it is critical to look at the laws which facilitated the issue being addressed.
The current issue stems back from the signing of the “anti-gay propaganda” law by President
Vladimir Putin in July of 2013. The statute makes it illegal to spread “propaganda of non-
traditional sexual relations” among minors. However, it is important to note that the concept of
the law is not new. Beginning in 2006, ten Russian regions passed similar laws banning
“homosexual propaganda” to minors and equated same-sex relations with pedophilia, even
though same-sex relations had been deemed legal activity by the Russian Federation, and more
importantly pedophilia illegal, since 1993 (HRC, 3). The definition of “propaganda” is almost
important, in Article 6.21 it states that:
“Propaganda is the act of distributing information among minors that 1) is aimed
at the creation of nontraditional sexual attitudes, 2) makes nontraditional sexual
relations attractive, 3) equates the social value of traditional and nontraditional

Blichar Jr. 3
sexual relations, or 4) creates and interest in nontraditional sexual relations”
(Grekov).
However, another important key note is that this law and definition is very ambiguous
and does not clearly define what a “nontraditional sexual relation” is. That aside what the bill
allows authorities to do is punish anyone who is accused or proven of violating the law of up to
5,000 rubles, the equivalent of 500 US Dollars, and even higher fines for public officials (50,000
and rubles) and media outlets (HRC, 3). What is even more interesting to note is that the bill was
officially passed and implemented into law during the Sochi Olympic Games in February of
2014 creating quite a stir for the international community. However, the question becomes then
what have the impacts of this law been on the queer community living in Russia since?
Many of the concerns initially came from the international community is because
contrary to what the International Olympic Committee stated, any Olympic athlete, trainer,
reporter, family member, or fan who is queer or accused of being queer could be sentenced to jail
time based on the language of the statute (Fierstein). Aside from the fines, the law also laid out a
provision allowing for police officers to arrest tourists and foreign nationals which were
suspected of being queer or an ally to the queer community, and would be detained for up to 14
days. However, the effects of the bill go beyond just the Sochi Olympic Games, Since the law
has been passed many of those who identify in the queer community have faced heightened
violence and increased attacks in the year of 2014.
Many times vigilante groups who have taken advantage of what the law states have taken
to social media to lure gay men in particular into meetings and attacking them on video (HRC,
6). The Human Rights Watch also reported that after the passage of the law, homophobic

Blichar Jr. 4
rhetoric and violent attacks have increased. Many times these attacks have been dismissed by
police and even when crimes are prosecuted, the sentences are often very light. Other attacks
include an incident in which participants in a queer rights event were doused in liquid and
sickening gases by attackers in St. Petersburg in September of 2013 (Keating). Another attack in
March of 2014 at the La Sky LGBT Center in St. Petersburg as well, resulted in the blindness of
one man, but after authorities arrested the attackers, they classified it as “hooliganism” rather
than charging it as a hate crime (Amnesty International). Overall the violence against the queer
community has heighted a great deal which has forced more people to become closeted, more
depressed, and less out than they were.
Nevertheless, the initial intent of the law, which revolved around fining individuals of
spreading “propaganda” persisted heavily during the years after the passage of the statute. The
effects of the law have brought about a significant restriction on the ability for those in the queer
community and their straight allies to use free and open expression. The first fines were officially
carried out in December of 2013, when Nikolai Alexeyev, the founder of the Moscow Gay Pride
Movement and other members were fined 4,000 rubles for picketing in front of a children’s
library holder banners that read: “Gay propaganda does not exist. People do not become gay,
people are born gay” (Dagov). This speaks to the trends that many of the fines given out where
never to small and many times charges were given based on video games, signs, literature, and
much more. Another interesting case to note is that even a ninth grade student was investigated
for spreading propaganda after she told her classmates that she was a lesbian, which has caused
fear for her and many other teenage students within Russia to either come out or be open about
themselves.

Blichar Jr. 5
Another very important point to note, is that since the passage of the statute the number
of requests for immigration and asylum have risen. For the United States, the number of Russian
seeking asylum rose by sixteen percent in 2013 (HRC, 5). Most of these requests came from
individuals who specialized in journalism, the arts, and many other professions such as doctors,
teachers, and politicians. One example includes the request by LGBT activist Viacheslav Revin
who applied for political asylum in the United States in 2013 after receiving threats from the
police if he returned to Russia (Seddon). Overall, it is clear that the current law as it stands has
created an atmosphere in which queer Russians are attacked, persecuted, and criminalized by the
Russian government. Which begs the question of whether or not Russia has indeed violated
international human rights law. In order to do this it is important to analyze both the literature
and finding in current cases of international law to answer this question moving forward.
Literature Review and the Findings
Many of the pieces done revolving around the Russian Federation and the queer
community have pointed out that Russia has indeed been in violation of certain international
human rights laws to which they are a party of. Many authors point to the concept of state
responsibility and obligations as the groundwork for the arguments made against Russia’s anti-
gay propaganda laws. The United Nations Human Rights Commission, specifically outlines that
states have obligations and duties under international law to respect, protect, and fulfill human
rights. The concept of respecting human rights refers to states refraining from interfering in the
enjoyment of human rights by its citizens. The Commission also argues that the obligation to
protect requires a state to stop human rights abuses to groups and individuals and that all states
should respect the human rights with others.

Blichar Jr. 6
Russia’s International Obligations
One of the most notable points made in many pieces of literature includes the concept
that Russia’s recent trend of suppressing human rights has been evidenced and reviewed by the
European Court of Human Rights (Polsdofer, 1071). Out of all the cases that the court took up in
regards to the queer community from 2002 to 2007, over ninety-four percent of them, human
rights had been violated by Russia which are protected by the European Convention on Human
Rights (Polsdofer, 1071). However, authors have noted that many proponents of the anti-gay
propaganda law argue that human rights claims by the queer community places an existential
threat to the morality of their citizens as well as to Russia’s sovereignty.
In addition the use of “nontraditional sexual relations” in the “gay-propaganda” law’s
definition was used purposely to avoid stating homosexuals in particular. (Wilkinson, 6).
However as Wilkinson argues, Russia’s anti-gay laws only legitimizes the homophobic
discrimination and violence that is currently occurring creating more human rights violations.
Russia essentially is using the concept of “traditional values” as the foundation for human rights
norms, which has created the right of moral sovereignty as a blanket for many proponents of the
law to hide behind. Another important point noted by authors is that the Russian government’s
Criminal Code does not include the concept of a social group or protected group of people
(Human Rights Watch, 83). Therefore, the interpretation of including the queer community as a
protected class is excluded. However, most authors and many international texts would argue
definitively against such arguments made by the Russian Federation.
Many would argue that the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Universal Declaration on Human
Rights, all provide protections for the right to assemble in particular, something that Russia’s

Blichar Jr. 7
anti-gay propaganda laws prohibit in regards to organizing pride parades, protests, and
educational events. Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that
everyone has the freedom to assemble, and that no restrictions can be placed on said rights unless
it deliberately affects the national security of a state (Council of Europe, 13). Authors would
argue that because of this, although Russia has used the argument that queer rights to assemble
threatens sovereignty, many would find that no such instances have occurred before the
implementation of the anti-gay propaganda laws. It is also important to note that courts have
already declared the argument made by Russia to be invalid when the Alekseyev Court ruled that
the European Convention on Human Rights does indeed protect demonstration that may be
opposed by others (Polsdofer, 1078).
Another important point that authors point to is that Russia also has international and
domestic responsibility to protect human rights. The International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights in particular, which was ratified by Russia in 1973, requires that all states to
respect and ensure that all individuals within its territory be recognized regardless of race, sex,
religion, political affiliation, or other status (Human Rights Watch, 76). Many others have used
the “other status” language to argue that the queer community and their human rights are implied
by that definition. Another important point to note is that the ICCPR guarantees the right to life
in article 6 and the right to security of a person in article 9. It could be argued that many of the
recent and violent attacks committed against the queer community could be included under this
provision, arguing that Russia’s anti-gay propaganda laws inadvertently lead to human rights
violations from the violence and discrimination that these laws create. Not only that, but the
body which interprets and determines the compliance of states to the ICCPR is the United

Blichar Jr. 8
Nations Human Rights Committee, and more importantly the Committee has held that sexual
orientation is needed a protected status against discrimination.
Other courts such as the European Court on Human Rights has also at many times ruled
that sexual orientation is indeed a protected class. In Alekseyev vs. Russia, a case which was
brought before the European Court on Human Rights after a queer rights activist was arrested
and charged with violating the gay propaganda laws through trying to hold a pride parade in the
city of St. Petersburg (Dolgov). The Court ruled that a government must know the distinction
between advancing interests and providing support based on sexual orientation. In article
fourteen of the case documents the Court states that banning gay pride marches did indeed
constitute discrimination. The Court ruled that the Russian government’s true reason for banning
the marches was based not based on the behavior of the organizers, but rather because they were
associated with the queer community. However, authors also note that the European Court of
Human Rights has not actually issued a solid statement on the anti-gay propaganda laws
themselves.
Authors have pointed out that while courts such as the European Court on Human Rights
has not issues any specific rulings it has made rulings based on the outcomes that have come
about as a result of the new law. In the Sergey Kuznetsov v. Russia case, the court rejected
Russia’s arguments that were made when Russia stated that the state was only required to respect
and tolerate the rights of sexual minorities in the public sphere, not the private sphere. However,
the court noted in response that:
“There is no scientific evidence or sociological date at the Court’s disposal
suggesting that the mere mention of homosexuality, or open public debate about

Blichar Jr. 9
sexual minorities’ social status, would adversely affect children or “vulnerable
adults”. On the contrary, it is only through fair and public debate that society may
address such complex issues as the one raised in the present case. Such debate,
backed up by academic research, would benefit social cohesion by ensuring that
representatives of all views are heard, including the individuals concerned.”
(Kuznetsov v. Russia).
The reason the court ruled in the way was because Russia has clearly violated the freedom of
expression clause. Furthermore, the Court’s case law shows that any difference in treatment of
rights in general based primarily on sexual orientation is in fact discrimination and any state
partaking in this act would be in violation of the Convention, speaking directly the Russia in this
ruling. Focusing on the idea of children, many authors have looked at the Convention of the
Rights of the Child, since the party involved in the anti-gay propaganda law is children’s since it
bans spreading information about “non-traditional” relationships to them. Authors have argued
that in reality these anti-gay propaganda laws also discriminate against children and families who
may request information or have children who may want to openly express themselves (Human
Rights Watch, 82).
Reverting back to the UN Human Rights Committee, this body too has found states in
violation of their obligation to protect their citizens from violence based on sexual orientation.
Russia has been among those states found in violation. In October of 2012 the Committee ruled
against Russia in a case involving the conviction of a queer activist under a regional anti-gay
propaganda law (Human Rights Watch, 78.) The Committee officially ruled that Russia violated
the freedom of expression which is laid out in article 19 of the Human Rights doctrine. Authors
have also pointed to other United Nations bodies as evidence for the violation of human rights.

Blichar Jr. 10
The Committee has also made efforts to provide a stay on discriminatory laws and practices
against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity in all region of the
world. This motion was passed in UN General Assembly resolution 17/19 where it paved the
way for such as study as well as add to the discussion of how international human rights law can
be used to end the violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Ironically, among the few states that voted against the resolution Russia was one of them.
In November of that year, the General Assembly was presented with the information
from the study that was conducted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights’. Overall the study found that many of the discriminatory practices came in the form of
restrictions to freedom of expression, an argument made by much of the literature regarding
Russia’s anti-gay propaganda laws. As a result of the study the High Commissioner has
recommended that states carry out a number of measures to ensure the protection of the queer
community (19/41, 25). Authors argue that while such resolutions and study are not binding to
the states it raises the issue that such discrimination against the queer community is not
acceptable by the overall international community and especially by international bodies such as
the United Nations itself. What is also important too, is that as a result of the study done by the
Human Rights Committee, a campaign was launched in July of 2013 by the Committee itself
called Free and Equal (OHCHR). The campaign is an effort by members of the international
community to promote greater respect for the rights of the queer community through education.
What the campaign does is ultimately bring to light is the fact that the issue of discrimination and
violence against individuals based on sexual orientation and gender identity is in fact a matter of
international concern and one that includes the issues authors have been focusing on regarding
Russia. Other bodies on the United Nations too have expressed concerns, the UN Committee

Blichar Jr. 11
Against Torture also expressed concerns about Russia’s failure to react and bring charges against
those who have committed acts of violence against the queer community (Human Rights Watch,
78).
Authors have also pointed to the Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of
International Human Rights Law in Relations to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity as well
as grounds for proving Russia’s violation of human rights. The document provides that
“everyone, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, has the right to security of the
person and to protection by the State against violence or bodily harm, whether inflicted by
government officials or by any individual or group.” (The International Panel, 13). In regards to
Russia, many of the principles laid out by the document would be addressing the violence that
has occurred in Russia since the implementation of the anti-gay propaganda law. The Yogyakarta
Principles itself is a document developed in Indonesia in 2006 by many human rights law experts
from many different countries. The document provides principles and detailed obligations for
states to follow. More importantly it is states in the document that “The Yogyakarta Principles
affirm binding international legal standards with which all States must comply”. (The
International Panel, 7). However, it is also important to note that while many states have had
human rights law representative, the Russian Federation was not one of them, and authors have
argued that Russia is not likely to adopt such a document into its own laws.
Russia’s Domestic Obligations
The primary focus by much of the literature has been on the international obligations that
Russia has, findings that provide evidence for Russia’s violations, as well as current cases.
Nevertheless, authors in the literature also encourage analyzing Russia’s domestic obligations as

Blichar Jr. 12
well. It is important to note that Russia’s own constitution guarantees freedom from violence in
article 21 which states that:
“Nobody should be subjected to torture, violence, or other severe or humiliating
treatment or punishment.” (Human Rights Watch, 83).
More importantly, the Russian Constitution also protects Russian citizens from discrimination
and guarantees the right to freedom of expression. Authors note that Russia also does have the
capacity domestically to protect the queer community and that the Russian Constitution provides
for a supremacy of international agreements when a conflict arises in regards to domestic and
international law (Polsdofer, 1073). What authors point out is that even if Russia’s constitution
did not provide the very rights being broken as a result of the anti-gay propaganda law, the
government would still have to respect those rights because they are a party to groups such as the
European Convention on Human Rights. There are instances in which domestic cases have been
overturned by bodies like the European Convention on Human Rights. The Alekseyev v Russia
was a case that originated in Russia. In short the case involved a queer activist who was trying to
hold a pride parade but was shut down and arrested. When the case was brought on the domestic
level, a Russian district court dismissed it by citing the Russian Assemblies Act (Polsdofer,
1075). After being dismissed the case was taken to the European Court on Human Rights and a
different ruling was made. The government of Russia argued that banning the parade was the
only way in which it would avoid violence (Alekseyv v Russia). The ECHR argued that the
denial of such events were unnecessary and ruled that Russia has violated the European
Convention on Human Rights and the article which allows for the freedom of assembly.

Blichar Jr. 13
Overall, most of the literature and findings regarding the question of whether or not
Russia has indeed violated human rights in regards to the queer community is quite apparent.
The literature and findings which ultimately overlap suggest that Russia is indeed in violation of
international human rights law through many scopes. More importantly, the literature and
findings suggest that Russia overall has both international and domestic obligations to its citizens
when human rights are concerned which have been found by international bodies to be violations
of their obligations.
Discussion
Between the literature and the findings most of the evidence provided shows a clear
answer to the primary question being asked. One could come to the conclusion that Russia is
indeed in violation of international human rights laws. Primary examples which were pointed to
in the literature revolved around the rulings of the European Court on Human Rights, many times
the court ruled against Russia and had stated that the rights of citizens had indeed been violated
typically through some clause that fell into the European Convention on Human Rights.
Although sexual orientation and gender identity were not always a factor in why the ruling went
against Russia, it did point to the larger scope that by and large the queer community is in fact a
protected group, even if they are protected inadvertently.
What is also important to note is that while Russia’s has been found to be in violation of
its human rights obligations, no international body has specifically ruled that the anti-gay
propaganda laws were illegal or broke human rights violations itself. Instead, it was the
atmosphere and actions the law created that contributed to the stream of violations, primarily in
the restriction in the freedom of expression and the rise in violence against individuals based on

Blichar Jr. 14
their sexual orientation or gender identity. Other than the European Convention on Human
Rights, the United Nations too has addressed the issue, however none of what has been done is
legally binding. The question of whether or not the United Nations addressing this issue is either
positive or negative is important in going about handling Russia. On one hand, the recognition
by the United Nations and the UN Human Rights Committee in particular that the discrimination
and violence faced by the queer community is a problem promotes education and awareness,
however, there is no binding implementation that speaks directly to the rights of the queer
community itself. The only way Russia truly can be accused of violating human rights abuses in
through analyzing whether or not that state has violated other principles. For example the
literature tends to point out the freedom of expression, which is something laid out in human
rights law. Russia may have committed a violation in the way of freedom of expression but they
did not violate a human right based solely on the fact that the person was identifying within the
queer community. One could possibly argue that while the rulings are not made on the bases of
discrimination based on sexual orientation in particular, the fact that human rights violations are
still be found is important. What these issues have raised is awareness in the international
community as a whole about the violence and discrimination that occurs against the queer
community. It could be concluded that in created a law such as the anti-gay propaganda laws,
Russia has created an atmosphere for human rights violations which have been primarily directed
at the queer community.
Conclusion
Has the Russian Federation violated human rights by targeting the queer community? The
literature and findings on the subject seem to certainly suggest that Russia has indeed committed
human rights violations. However, as most of the literature and findings seem to point out most

Blichar Jr. 15
of the time the violations committed primarily because the target community is the queer
community, but rather because Russia has failed to uphold both its international and domestic
obligations of human rights to its citizens. The rights beings violated against the queer
community fall under the scope of many agreements to which Russia is a party to. While Russia
continues to use arguments of domestic security to push its anti-gay propaganda laws, in doing
so the state has created an atmosphere of violence and violations of human rights. Also,
international bodies such as the United Nations have in fact stated that sexual orientation and
gender identity are included in the protected classes for human rights, however what needs to be
researched further is whether or not those protected classes to could claim violation of human
rights based on sexual orientation and gender identity alone. Overall it can be said that Russia is
indeed in violation of human rights obligations to the queer community.

Blichar Jr. 16
Definitions
Included below is a list of definitions that are provided to offer an insight into the
individuals being discussed when the term “queer” is mentioned throughout the paper. These are
the individuals who would be affected by the anti-gay propaganda laws in Russia to give the
reader a reference to the diversity and scope of the community itself.
Gay: a male who is sexually and romantically attracted to other males.
Lesbian: a female who is sexually and romantically attracted to other males.
Bisexual: an individual who is sexually and romantically attracted to two or more genders.
Transgender: a term used to describe an individual who does not identify with the gender they
were assigned at birth.
Questioning: the process of understandings and exploring one’s sexuality.
Queer: an umbrella term to describe those who identify as anything other than heterosexual. I.e.
gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, questioning, asexual, intersex, pansexual, demisexual,
polysexual, polyamorous, gender non-conforming, romantic orientation.
Intersex: an individual born with ambiguous genitalia or ambiguous x/y chromosomes.
Grey-Asexual: an individual who does not experience sexual attraction often but does not
identify fully with either demisexual or asexual.
Asexual: an individual who does not experience sexual attraction.
Ally: an individual who supports and advocates for the queer community.

Blichar Jr. 17
Pansexual: an individual who is romantically and sexually attracted to an individual regardless
of their gender identity.
Demisexual: an individual who must experience a strong romantic attraction before a sexual
attraction can occur. Not to be confused with an individual who only has sex once they are in a
relationship.
Polysexual: an individual who is attracted to multiple different genders and/or sexes.
Polyamory: a relationship type in which more than one romantic and/or sexual relationship
occurs, however consent and recognition by all involved in required.
Gender Non-Conforming: an individual who does not identify as either male or female or a
person who does not conform to societal norms about gender identity.
 Gender Queer: another term used to identify someone who is gender non-
conforming.
 Agender: a person who does not identify with any gender.
 Bigender: a person who identifies as both male and female.
 Cisgender: a person who identifies with the gender they were assigned at birth.
 Gender Fluid: a person who switches their gender identity often throughout their
lifetime, they may identify as male then female, a combination of both, or none at
all at any given time.
 Third Gender: social category in societies that recognize a third gender other than
male or female, example: India.

Blichar Jr. 18
Romantic Orientation: an orientation in which only romantic attraction is involved. Example:
A male can identify as gay meaning he is sexually and romantically attracted to men, as well as
heteroromantic meaning he is only romantically attracted to females.
 Heteroromantic: an individual who is romantically attracted to the opposite sex.
 Homoromanitc: an individual who is romantically attracted to the same sex.
 Biromantic: an individual who is romantically attracted to two or more genders.
 Panromantic: an individual who is romantically attracted to someone regardless of
gender identity.
 Aromantic: an individual who does not experience romantic attraction.

Blichar Jr. 19
Bibliography
Amnesty International. “Russia Must Track Down Masked Assailants After Insidious
Homophobic Attack.” Amnesty International. 4 November 2013. 12 April 2015.
<https://www.amnesty.org/en/articles/news/2013/11/russia-must-track-down-masked-
assailants-after-insidious-homophobic-attack/>
Case of Alekseyev v. Russia. European Court of Human Rights. 21 October 2010.
Case of Sergey Kuznetsov v. Russia. European Court of Human Rights. 23 October 2008.
“Coming Out”, Transgender Legal Defense Project, and Russian LGBT Network.
Implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in the Russian
Federation: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues. Alternative Report. Vol.
111th Session. Geneva: Human Rights Committee, 2014.
Council of Europe. European Convention on Human Rights. By European Court on Human
Rights. Strasbourg: 1994.
Dolgov, Anna. “LGBT Activist Fined for Breaking ‘Gay Propaganda’ Law.” The Moscow Times.
The Moscow Times, 5 December 2013. 8 April 2015.
<http://www.themoscowtimes.com/new/article/lgbt-activist-fined-for-breaking-gay-
propaganda-law/490844.html>.
Free and Equal United Nations for LGBT Equality. Fact Sheet: International Human Rights Law
and Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. New York: United Nations Human Rights,
2015.

Blichar Jr. 20
Free and Equal United Nations for LGBT Equality. Fact Sheet: LGBT Rights: Frequently Asked
Questions. New York: United Nations Human Rights, 2015.
Fierstein, Harvey. “Russia’s Anti-Gay Crackdown.” New York Times 21 July 2013, New York
Edition, The Opinion Pages Section: A19.
General Assembly resolution 17/19, Human rights, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
A/HRC/RES/17/19 (14 July 2011).
Grekov, Innokenty. “Russia’s Anti-Gay Law, Spelled Out in Plain English.” Policy.Mic. Mic, 8
August 2013. 8 April 2015. <http://mic.com/articles/58649/russia-s-anti-gay-law-spelled-
out-in-plain-english>
Human Rights Campaign. Russia: Year in Review Report. Report. Washington D.C.: Human
Rights Campaign Foundation, 2015.
Human Rights First. How to Stop Russia from Exporting Homophobia. Report. New York:
Human Rights First, 2015.
The Human Rights Watch. License to Harm: Violence and Harassment against LGBT People
and Activists in Russia. New York: Human Rights Watch, 2014.
The International Panel of Experts in International Human Rights Law and on Sexual Orientation
and Gender Identity. The Yogyakarta Principles. By The International Panel of Experts.
2007.
Keating, Joshua. “The Chilling Effects of Russia’s Anti-Gay Law, One Year Later.” Slate
Outward: Expanding the LGBTQ Conversation. Slate, 9 October 2014. 8 April 2015.

Blichar Jr. 21
<http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/10/09/russian_lgbt_activists_on_the_effects_
of_gay_propaganda_law.html>.
Kirchick, James, and Andras Simonyi. Using the Magnitsky Act to Put Russian Oppressors of
LGBT Citizens on Notice. Washington D.C.: Foreign Policy Initiative, 2013.
Polsdofer, Stephan. “Pride and Prejudiced: Russia’s Anti-Gay Propaganda Law Violates the
European Convention on Human Rights.” American University International Law Review
29.5 (2014): 1069-1096.
Rose, Scott. “Putin Signs Law Banning Gay ‘Propaganda’ Among Children.” Bloomberg
Business. Bloomberg, 30 June 2013. 8 April 2015.
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-30/putin-signs-law-banning-gay-
propaganda-among-children>.
Seddon, Max. “How One Subtweet Spurred an LGBT Activist to Flee Russia.” Buzzfeed News
World. Buzzfeed, 14 November 2013. 12 April 2015.
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/how-one-subtweet-spurred-an-lgbt-activist-to-
flee-russia#.ytRIbMO77>.
United Nations, General Assembly, Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence
against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity: Report of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights’, A/HRC/19/41 (17 November
2011).
United Nations Human Rights. “Free and Equal: A New Global Public Education Campaign
against Homophobia and Transphobia.” Office of the High Commissioner for Human

Blichar Jr. 22
Rights. 26 July 2013. 12 April 2015.
<http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/FreeAndEqualCampaign.aspx>
Wilkinson, Cai. “Putting Traditional Values into Practice: Russia’s Anti-Gay Laws.” Russian
Analytical Digest 138 (2013): 5-7.

HumanRightsRussiaPOL321

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (14)

Similar to HumanRightsRussiaPOL321

Similar to HumanRightsRussiaPOL321 (18)

HumanRightsRussiaPOL321