In October of last year, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Russia had violated articles 11 (freedom of assembly), 13 (right of redress) and 14 (non-discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights when Moscow authorities denied permission for pride marches in 2006, 20, and those denials were upheld by Russian courts. Violations of the right to assembly in the context of LGBT pride events have been documented in shadow reports submitted to the Human Rights Committee regarding a number of European and Central Asian countries, including Croatia, Uzbekistan, Moldova, and Russia. Member states should take appropriate measures to prevent restrictions on the effective enjoyment of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly resulting from the abuse of legal or administrative provisions, for example on grounds of public health, public morality and public order. Member states should ensure that law enforcement authorities take appropriate measures to protect participants in peaceful demonstrations in favor of the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons from any attempts to unlawfully disrupt or inhibit the effective enjoyment of their right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.Īrticle 16. Member states should take appropriate measures at national, regional and local levels to ensure that the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, as enshrined in Article 11 of the Convention, can be effectively enjoyed, without discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity.Īrticle 15. The recommendations are minimum standards. On March 31, 2010, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted a set of recommendations (CM/Rec (2010), 5 addressed to member states, including Hungary, on measures to combat discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity. Russia in 2010, the European Court of Human Rights ruled unanimously that banning a LGBT pride parade violated the right to freedom of assembly and association. In Bączkowski and Others v Poland in 2005 and Alekseyev v.
The right to the freedom of assembly is enshrined in Article 11 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Approximately 450 lesbians, gays, and supporters gathered in the city center for the event.ĭuring the march, though, several LGBT people were subjected to physical and verbal abuse, and crowds of counter-demonstrators threw explosive devices, eggs, cobblestones, and bottles at the participants. As a result 10 people were injured and 45 detained. In 2008, the police had denied a permit for a gay pride march on similar grounds but withdrew its objections following a letter from 15 LGBT organizations and the rejection by Gábor Demszky, the Budapest mayor at that time, of the claim that the parade would unduly obstruct traffic. The court refuted the police claims that the extended route of the march would unduly obstruct traffic. In February, the organizers of the event decided to extend the route to end at Parliament Square, but the police denied their request. Because the police did not deny the request within two days, it was automatically approved under national law.
Rainbow Mission Foundation made a formal request to the police in September 2010 to hold the gay pride march in June 2011. The Hungarian decision is reflective of recent developments in Europe (see below). Amnesty International had previously voiced concerns that denial of the extension would be a violation of the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and non-discrimination under the ICCPR and ECHR. The Budapest police had denied the extension earlier this month. The extended route will bring the 2011 Budapest Gay Pride March past the Hungarian parliament building. Human Rights Watch has reported that the Budapest Metropolitan Court decided on February 1 “to allow an extended route for a gay pride march” planned by the Rainbow Mission Foundation for June 18, 2011.