By CIVICUS
Jul 1 2024 –  
CIVICUS discusses the criminalisation of same-sex relations in Iraq with Sarah Sanbar, researcher at Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa division.

Sarah Sanbar

The Iraqi parliament recently passed a law criminalising LGBTQI+ people, punishing same-sex relations with between 10 and 15 years in prison and transgender identities with sentences of one to three years. The original proposal included even harsher penalties, but lawmakers introduced amendments in response to strong criticism. Supporters claim the law upholds deeply held religious values, while critics condemn it for institutionalising discrimination and enabling serious human rights abuses.

What led to recent legislative changes criminalising LGBTQI+ people?

On 27 April 2024, the Iraqi parliament passed an amendment to the country’s 1988 anti-prostitution law, effectively criminalising same-sex relations and transgender identities. The amendment states that same-sex relations are punishable with between 10 and 15 years in prison, and provides for one to three years’ imprisonment for those who undergo or perform gender-affirming medical procedures.

The law also punishes those who ‘imitate women’ with a seven-year prison sentence and a fine of between 10 and 15 million Iraqi dinars (approx. US$7,700 to US$11,500) and criminalises the ‘promotion of homosexuality’, a vague and undefined expression.

The passing of this law follows years of steadily increasing hostile rhetoric against LGBTQI+ people. Prominent politicians and media personalities have consistently spread harmful stereotypes, tropes and disinformation. They often claim homosexuality is a western import that goes against traditional Iraqi values.

This rhetoric has increasingly translated into government action. For example, on 8 August 2023, the Communications and Media Commission issued a directive ordering all media outlets to replace the term ‘homosexuality’ with ‘sexual deviance’ in all published and broadcast language. The directive also banned the use of the word ‘gender’, which shows how the crackdown on LGBTQI+ rights is intertwined with broader issues, and is also used to target and silence women’s rights organisations working on gender-based violence.

Sadly, as in many other countries, LGBTQI+ people in Iraq are being used as political pawns and scapegoats to distract from the government’s failure to provide for its people. Tensions are growing between the more conservative and religious groups in society and government and those that take a more secular approach to governance. The fact that conservatives have gained increasing support in successive elections allows laws like this to be passed. Such a law probably wouldn’t have been passed even a few years ago.

What’s the situation of LGBTQI+ people in Iraq, and how do you expect it to change?

The situation of LGBTQI+ people is extremely unsafe. Threats to their physical safety, including harassment, assault, arbitrary detention, kidnappings and killings, come from society at large – including family and community members as well as strangers – and from armed groups and state personnel. Human Rights Watch has documented cases of abductions, rape, torture and killings by armed groups. Impunity is widespread, and the government’s failure to hold perpetrators accountable sends the message that this violence is acceptable.

With the passage of the new law, the already dire situation is expected to worsen. Tolerance for abuses has now been made explicit through legislation. As a result, an increase in violence is to be expected, along with an increase in the number of LGBTQI+ Iraqis fleeing the country to seek safety elsewhere. Unfortunately, it is becoming even harder for LGBTQI+ Iraqis to ensure their physical safety in the country, let alone lead fulfilling lives, find love, make friends and build links with others in their community.

What are the challenges facing Iraqi LGBTQI+ rights organisations?

The space for LGBTQI+ organisations in Iraq has long been extremely limited. For example, in May 2023, a court in the Kurdistan Region ordered the closure of Rasan, one of the few groups willing to publicly advocate for LGBTQI+ rights in the region. The reason the court gave for its closure was its activities ‘in the field of homosexuality’, and one piece of evidence cited was its use of rainbow colours in its logo.

Organisations such as Rasan have previously been targeted under vaguely worded morality and public indecency laws that restrict freedom of expression. By criminalising the ‘promotion of homosexuality’, the new law makes the work of LGBTQI+ organisations even more dangerous. Any action in support of LGBTQI+ rights could be perceived as ‘promoting homosexuality’, which could lead to activities being banned or organisations being shut down. It will be almost impossible for LGBTQI+ rights organisations to operate openly.

In addition, all civil society organisations in Iraq must register with the Directorate of NGOs, a process that includes submitting bylaws, lists of activities and sources of funding. But now, it is essentially impossible for LGBTQI+ organisations to operate transparently, because they can’t openly state their intention to support LGBTQI+ people without risking closure or prosecution. This leaves two options: stop working, or operate clandestinely with the risk of arrest hanging over them.

Given the restrictive legal and social environment, many organisations operate from abroad. IraQueer, one of the most prominent LGBTQI+ advocacy groups, is based in Sweden.

But despite the challenges, LGBTQI+ organisations continue to advocate for LGBTQI+ rights, help people fleeing persecution and work with foreign governments to put pressure on Iraq to roll back discriminatory policies. And they have made significant achievements, facilitating the safe passage of people fleeing persecution and broadening coalitions to advocate for LGBTQI+ rights internationally. Their perseverance in the face of adversity is inspiring.

What international support do local LGBTQI+ groups need?

Global organisations should use their capacity to sound the alarm and advocate for the repeal of the new law and the reversal of other discriminatory measures, and for impunity for violence against LGBTQI+ people in Iraq to be addressed.

An effective strategy could be to focus on human rights violations. Equal protection from violence and equal access to justice are required under international law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Arab Charter on Human Rights, both of which Iraq has signed. Advocacy for LGBTQI+ rights as human rights can put greater pressure on the Iraqi government to fulfil its obligations.

It’s also essential to provide resources and support to local organisations in Iraq and in host countries where LGBTQI+ Iraqis seek refuge, to ensure people have access to basic needs and community support, and can live full lives without fear.

Civic space in Iraq is rated ‘closed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.

Get in touch with Human Rights Watch through its website, and follow @hrw and @SarahSanbar on Twitter.

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By James E. Jennings
ATLANTA, Georgia, Jul 1 2024 – The rule at Pottery Barn is “You break it, you bought it.” It should be for Israel as well. The Netanyahu government’s eight-month long bombing campaign in Gaza, nearly half of the strikes by 2,000 lb. “dumb” or unguided bombs, has destroyed a high percentage of housing units in the territory.

Hospitals, universities, schools, vocational training centers, mosques, and one church and a Christian hospital were bombed deliberately. If—and when—the war is over, who will pay for the damage to Gaza’s infrastructure? The answer is that Israel must pay.

The death toll among Palestinian civilians is horrific—as everybody knows—over 37,000 by now according to UN data, one third of them children, with many corpses still under the rubble. None of the children killed in the Netanyahu war cabinet’s genocidal attacks ever voted for HAMAS or had anything to do with the October 7th bloody razzia by Yahya Sinwar’s minions.

Long after the hated name HAMAS is expunged from history, Israel’s far greater barbarity will remain, having stained the nation forever.

This war needs to stop. If the word “inhumane” no longer has meaning, we are all in trouble. Despite warnings by President Biden and Secretary of State Blinken not to give way to rage and keep killing civilians unnecessarily, US funding for the war has continued and even increased by lopsided congressional votes.

While the nearly 1.5 million displaced Palestinians in Rafah huddle in their tents waiting the bombing that is sure to come, the hypocrisy of US leaders is transparent and galling—“Don’t kill civilians—but here’s plenty of money and bombs to do it with.”

Most commentators say Netanyahu is headed for the political scrap heap and possibly to jail when this war is over. He therefore has an incentive to keep the war going as long as possible. And Biden’s “pause” in sending more 2,000 lb. bombs to Israel is a joke—everybody knows they will get there eventually.

What will even be left of Gaza’s infrastructure in another few months? Looking forward, who will build homes for the more than half of Gaza’s 2.3 million dispossessed people who are now living on the streets or under plastic sheets with summer’s raging heat continuing?

Why should US taxpayers pay for Israel’s ammunition that is even now killing multitudes of innocent people, and then pay to rebuild their homes? Why should the Arab Gulf states, as they have been doing for decades. pay for the damage?

No–Israel must pay. They broke it and they must fix it. That does not mean that they can colonize and keep it to compensate themselves. Expulsion of the Arab citizens and annexation and colonization of the territory would be another international war crime on top of the ones already committed.

It’s true that HAMAS started the war with its obscene killing and capturing of civilians. But nobody alive on planet earth for the last 75 years really believes that the clock started Oct. 7. The fact is that this mad and bloody Arab-Israeli conflict began over a century ago. Over half of the families now in Gaza were forcibly evicted from their homes and villages in southern Palestine in the 1948 Nakba (disaster).

The tragedy is that two of the world’s most high-sounding religions, Judaism and Islam, have stooped to such inhumanity and have belied their principles, making both HAMAS and hyper-Zionist Israel global bywords of scorn for their inhumane actions.

Netanyahu and the Israeli leadership have for decades put into effect a very clever plan: transfer the costs of operating the West Bank to Arab allies, the US and the international community, and the eternally hopeful PLO-led Palestinians—and, after 2007, to HAMAS in Gaza, but never with any intention of allowing anything near full statehood to develop.

The Palestinians, the UN, the Arab States, and the world community have been duped for decades, paying for maintenance of the West Bank quasi-government and the reconstruction of South Lebanon and Gaza following the many wars with Israel. Who paid for all those Israeli jet fighters, tanks, and bombs? The ever-gullible US voters.

The Arab World, the US taxpayers, and especially the Palestinians national leaders, were suckers, paying for false Israeli promises of Palestinian independence, only to be occupied militarily, while being continuously and intermittently bombed into submission. American politicians are just waking up to this reality.

Israel—especially the Netanyahu government—has never had any intention of allowing a truly independent state on the West Bank and in Gaza. The US and the Gulf States, along with numerous international organizations, have supported Palestinian life and livelihood for decades, but that should end. Israel should either put up or shut up.

Is the “Two-State Solution” a chimera or a mirage? Will Israel assume its full obligations under international law? What is the point of creating a Bantustan on the West Bank, and possibly another one in Gaza, as if they represent real countries with genuine statehood, borders, and independence?

As the occupying power controlling life on the West Bank for 56 years ever since the 1967 War–and now for Gaza as the blockading power and besieging entity, Israel is legally responsible under international law.

Both areas are the responsibility of Israel. It’s time they started paying their own bills and not looking to US citizens or the Arab States to pick up the check. Israel must pay. You broke it—you fix it.

James E. Jennings, PhD, is an advocate for Palestinian Human and Civil Rights and for greater understanding of the Middle East by Americans. He has delivered humanitarian aid in Palestine, Gaza, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Iran for over half a century, receiving among others, an award from the Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees. Jennings has appeared on CNN, FOX, al-Jazeera, and other media in the US and abroad. He is president of the aid organization Conscience International www.conscienceinternational.org and director of its US Academics for Peace program.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Emilio Godoy
LA PAZ, Mexico, Jul 1 2024 – The port of Pichilingue, in northwestern Mexico, faces challenges in decarbonising its activities, as do other maritime infrastructures in the country, while its polluting emissions are increasing.

The port, on the Pacific coast, has docks for ferries and merchant ships, and offers services such as drinking water, food, fuel, electricity and garbage collection, to serve ships arriving from other parts of Mexico, the United States and Asia.

This facility, owned by the Administración Portuaria Integral (API) of Baja California Sur, a peninsular state in the northwestern corner of the country, is expanding to accommodate more ships, passengers and cargo, as are other Mexican ports along the Pacific and Atlantic coasts.

Also, La Paz, the state capital, is under pressure to control its port activity, so the regional API is transferring to Pichilingue what it can no longer do in La Paz, such as cruise ship arrivals. Its location also facilitates its integration into a northwest circuit in the transport between Mexico and neighbouring United States.

The environmental situation of the ports requires measures, while Mexico is barely on the way to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, generated by human activities and causing global warming.”Small efforts are being made in the right direction. There are initial actions that can help, such as energy efficiency measures and changing light bulbs. But a port cannot be separated from shipping”: Kristina Abhold

Experts consulted by IPS acknowledged progress in containing these emissions, but warned of the need to design comprehensive policies that include ports and maritime transport.

“Small efforts are being made in the right direction. There are initial actions that can help, such as energy efficiency measures and changing light bulbs. But a port cannot be separated from shipping,” Kristina Abhold, an expert with the non-governmental Global Maritime Forum, told IPS at a port forum in La Paz.

The 36 ports of the 17 administrations of the National Port System, administered by the Ministry of the Navy (Semar), emitted 1.33 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent in 2022, almost double the level of 2021.

This is detailed in Semar’s Port Decarbonisation Strategy, which IPS obtained through a public information request and which only has the consolidated data up to that year.

A ferry unloads goods at the port of Pichilingue, in the municipality of La Paz, in the northwestern state of Baja California Sur, on Mexico’s Pacific coast. The maritime sector, which includes ports and ships, faces significant challenges in reducing its polluting emissions. Credit: Emilio Godoy / IPS

More ships, more CO2

Maritime trade has grown in Mexico since then, and probably so have GHG emissions.

Emissions from its customers’ activities, known as Scope 3 (A3), doubled in 2022 compared to the previous year.

The Greenhouse Gas Protocol standards, the most widely used in the world, classify emissions coming from energy an industry consumes (A1) and from energy it purchases from others (A2).

A1 emissions rose 38 %, while A2 emissions rose 12 %.

As for cargo, the port of Manzanillo, located in the western state of Colima, the largest in the country and a leader in container movement, received the most between January and April this year and released 30 % more emissions into the atmosphere in 2022.

The measurements involve the activity of cargo ships, vessels parked at the port, cargo handling equipment, locomotives and cargo trucks, as well as the operation of terminals, operators, service providers, shipping lines, shipping and customs agents, and road and rail transport companies.

Port sustainability includes consideration of environmental, economic and social aspects, such as pollution, dredging of nearby areas, return on investment and job creation.

Shipping represents the second mode of transport for foreign trade in Mexico. The National Port System, with 103 ports, handled 90.86 million tonnes of cargo in the first four months of this year, almost 3 % less than in the same period of 2023.

In the opinion of Tania Miranda, Director of Environment and Climate Change Programme of the non-governmental Institute of the Americas (IOA), the steps taken are still incipient.

“We are in our infancy. It’s a process that has been going on for a short time in one of the industries that is most behind in the process, and it’s a difficult sector to do it. Investing in this type of project has been difficult,” she told IPS from the U.S. city of San Diego, which borders Mexico’s northern border.

Even so, “in the last two years efforts have been made, there was progress in inventories, there were investments in digitalisation of operations, which can lead to a reduction in emissions,” she emphasized.

With more than 100 ports and more than 11.000 square kilometres of coastline on the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, Mexico’s trade is one of the busiest in Latin America, facing major challenges to decarbonise port operations and shipping. Infographic: Semar

Beginners

The largest Mexican ports have taken environmental measures, but they are insufficient to address the problem.

 Manzanillo and Ensenada, the fifth largest port but the second busiest, located in Baja California and a logistics hub between Asia and the United States, have master port development programmes where environmental impact is not mentioned.

Moreover, no Mexican – or Latin American – port appears on the project map of the World Ports Sustainability Programme that covers the largest such facilities on the planet. The country also lacks a clean marine fuel refining project.

For Carlos Martner, coordinator of Integrated Transport and Logistics of the governmental Mexican Institute of Transport, some ports, especially the larger ones, have made more progress.

“The issue is coming on strong and there will be more and more demands to improve processes. But a comprehensive policy is needed that encompasses the ports,” he told IPS in La Paz.

The national strategy sees a 25 % reduction of emissions by 2030 and of 45 % by 2050, but only proposes general measures, such as planning resilient infrastructure, harmonising management and planning instruments like concession titles, master development programmes and operating rules, as well as identifying, describing and programming the application of low-emission energy policies.

Semar has also identified and is to implement measures such as the development of green shipping corridors, energy efficiency, resilient infrastructure planning, and optimisation of traceability and waste utilisation.

Manoeuvres in the port of Veracruz, in the south-eastern state of the same name and Mexico’s third largest. Large port facilities in the country have taken some measures to reduce pollution from their activities, but they are not enough to have clean and sustainable ports. Credit: Emilio Godoy / IPS

However, Mexico did not sign up to the Clydebank Declaration for Green Shipping Corridors in November 2021 during the Glasgow climate summit, which aims to create at least six low-emission corridors by 2025 and which only 24 countries have signed.

Mexico must also meet the goals of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to lower CO2 emissions for all international shipping by at least 40 % by 2030, compared to 2008 levels.

The IMO also sets the adoption of zero or near-zero emission energy sources, fuels and/or technologies at 5 %, with a target of 10 %, of the energy used by international shipping by 2030.

Abhold, from the Global Maritime Forum,  proposed electric shipping to reduce emissions. “This decarbonises both sides of the chain and a port fee including externalities can be charged, as other ports do. But a comprehensive policy with clear goals is needed. There is a lack of signals from the government and incentives,” she stressed.

Miranda, from the IOA, said that substantial investment and coordination between government agencies in the sector at all port levels is necessary.

“The document will not achieve anything by itself. There are legal, fiscal and operational issues. I would love to see transversality with the treasury, the environmental sector. Without including ships, Mexico’s progress will be very poor. There is a dissociation between port management and maritime transport,” she stressed.

The expert Martner foresaw international pressure for the creation of green shipping corridors.

“They can be developed in the ports bordering the United States. For example, cruise ships can transit that lane. There is great pressure there to improve water quality, emissions, waste treatment. It’s a long road, but action has already been taken,” he said.