The course of LGBTI+ policies and activities in local governments

31/01/2022 | Writer: Defne Güzel

Defne Güzel wrote the course of LGBTI+ policies and activities in local governments in the file that we prepared by chanting the motto: equality is every day and everywhere, not just one day.

Introduction:

From past to present, LGBTI+ organizations and activists have been interacting with local governments in various ways. These interactions paved the way for local governments to accelerate their activities in the LGBTI+ field, especially after 2013. For organizing the "7 Colors 7 Film LGBT Film Festival" in 2007[1], the registration application of Kaos GL Izmir to Konak Municipality was denied with the claim of “homosexuality is not public”. On the other hand, during Kaos GL's visit to then-Deputy Mayor of Çankaya, Eser Atak, improvements such as the decision on “strengthening bilateral relations” have been achieved[2].

Activists and LGBTI+ organizations’ interactions and relationships with local governments have evolved into a completely different process with the Gezi Movement in 2013[3]. The 2013 Istanbul Pride Parade, which coincided with the protest processes, was expressed with the participation of hundreds of thousands. To give examples of this period in which the relationship with local governments gained momentum; LGBTI+ activist Boysan Yakar became a municipal councilor candidate from Şişli district in the 2014 local elections with his openly gay identity, and was later appointed as the Advisor to the President by the then Mayor of Şişli Hayri İnönü.[4]. During this period, SPoD also prepared LGBTI+ Friendly Municipality Protocol and ran a campaign for this unin 2014. This protocol was later opened for petition among mayoral candidates[5].

These developments affected not only the municipal structures but also the city council structures. For instance, The LGBTI+ Working Group, established by the Nilufer Municipality City Council Youth Assembly, organized the Anti-HTB (Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia) Student Meeting in 2015 in partnership with Ozgur Renkler Dernegi (Free Colors Association)[6]. Besides this example; activist Demet Yanardag was elected as the Chair of the Konak City Council Equality Assembly in 2016[7].

The examples mentioned or not mentioned here show that LGBTI+ activists are changing, transforming and strengthening local governments in the direction of inclusion, awareness and equal citizenship from past to present.

LGBTI+ Struggle in the Grip of Right-Wing Populism and Pandemic

Last three years we left behind witnessed developments that deeply affected our lives. Although what has happened in these three years necessitates a memory and strategy work on local governments, especially the rising right-wing populism has surrounded social movements with a streak of uncertainty in the current period. Right-wing populism used its scare, intimidation, and anxiety-inducing tactics over vulnerable groups such as the LGBTI+s, disabled people, elderly people, sex workers and people living with HIV. In this sense, the gaps in the legal legislation were used to the detriment of disadvantaged individuals and groups. For example, Istanbul Pride Parade 2021, intended to be organized, was banned by the Beyoglu District Governor's Office with vague reasoning such as a threat to "public morality" and "public health"[8]. The disintegrated justice system and institutions left the subjects to resort to individual coping methods. The ban on LGBTI+ events in Ankara[9], the Head of Religious Affairs Directorate Ali Erbas’ rhetoric targeting LGBTI+ groups and people living with HIV during a Friday Prayer[10], the state of emergency period, and the appointment of administrative trustees in local governments are some examples of this process.

In the period following these developments, the impact of the COVID-19 led to a global decrease in social contact, which further limited the visibility of issues and increased the needs of LGBTI+s. As a marginalized group, socialization is vital for LGBTI+s, (and without social interactions) the mental health of LGBTI+s has further suffered from anxiety and stress. The need for mechanisms preventing violence increased even further, as LGBTI+s were systematically targeted by the high-level officials of the government. During the pandemic, LGBTI+s had to cope with many problems and human rights violations such as financial difficulties, social isolation, violations of the right to work, violation of the right to life, hate crime and hate speech. Alonside that the occupational health and safety of trans sex workers, who had to work during the pandemic period, have been brought to the political agenda,  sex workers were also evicted from their homes by the police raids in the middle of the pandemic[11]. These incidents continue to be experienced by communities, and details of these incidents can be accessed through the pandemic reports produced by LGBTI+ organizations[12]. 

These recent problems negatively affected the LGBTI+ policies and activities of local governments. With the impact of the pandemic, local governments could not implement LGBTI+ activities in this period. While the appointment of trustees brought LGBTI+ activities and policies in local governments to a standstill, local governments were targeted in the media in terms of LGBTI+ policies and activities due to increasing right-wing populism and conservatism[13].

Problems and Solutions:

LGBTI+ organizations, which have gained experience in working with local governments, have organized and are still organizing a series of activities in order to discuss the difficulties experienced in working with municipalities recently[14]. Within this framework, Kaos GL Association carried out a series of activities in the scope of the “Strengthening Advocacy for Equal Rights” project. Series of online focus groups with the participation of LGBTI+ organizations, local governments, municipal equality units, representatives of women's organizations, and activists who engage with local governments were conducted. The outputs of these sessions that aimed to discuss issues and solutions produced concrete problem statements and practical solutions to these problems.

Main Problems:

What was conveyed in the meetings held showed that the limited autonomy of the municipalities tied their hands in terms of policies. At a period where the concept of LGBTI+ is criminalized and demonized, even the municipalities of the opposition parties are manipulated on LGBTI+ rights. Appointments of administrative trustees (from the central government) affect the activities and policies of the municipalities negatively. Increasing number of bans on LGBTI+ events have been worsening the communication. These bans have negatively affected both LGBTI+ organizations and municipalities. District governorates and sub-district governorates ban the LGBTI+ activities of the municipalities, and sometimes even threaten the municipalities to prevent these activities from taking place.

After the last local elections, it is evident that the advocacy perspective of the local governments has disappeared. The reluctance, intimidation and manipulation displayed in realizing LGBTI+ activities show that their strategies are effective. Lack of congratulatory messaging from the local governments on LGBTI+ achievements and anniversaries can be shown as one example.

Solution Suggestions:

Some of the solution suggestions expressed in the focus group studies were as follows:

·      Considering the current problems, all levels of municipalities, including senior management, should be aware of LGBTI+ rights.

·      Best practices should be presented to local governments to provide inspiration and strength to support LGBTI+ causes; local governments should be applauded for their activities to support LGBTI+.

·      We should attempt to affect policies of political parties through campaigns, and LGBTI+ activists should be employed in different levels of the municipalities.

·      Municipalities should be monitored by civil society organizations and City Councils, and in coordination with the CSOs, a pressure over municipalities should be created to LGBTI+ rights advocacy.

·      Municipalities should establish an LGBTI+ inclusive policy ground on human rights.

·      Threats against the autonomy of the local governments have a direct negative impact on municipalities’ role in promoting LGBTI+ policies and activities. Not only the appointment of trustees or the mayoralty of the ruling party, but also the changes to be made in municipal laws and regulations carry the risk of eliminating the advocacy perspective of the municipalities. Considering these reasons, campaigns should be carried out for the autonomy of municipalities.

·      Units and departments of municipalities focusing on LGBTI+ related works should coordinate on the national level. Coordination platforms and infrastructures should be established.

·      LGBTI+s should actively benefit from the services provided by the municipalities. To achieve this, municipalities should transform services, such as the provision of hotlines, services on sheltering and services of public toilets, and raise personnel awareness to be inclusive of LGBTI+s.

Conclusion:

Local governments’ actions with the vision of equal citizenship have been strengthening LGBTI+ policies and activities from past to present. Today, many municipalities provide services to LGBTI+s, and include LGBTI+ activists and organizations in the decision-making at a city level. These positive results change and transform both municipalities, LGBTI+ activists and organizations so much, so that some municipalities continue working with LGBTI+s and carrying out LGBTI+ activities today[15]. In addition to this, including SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) phrases to local equality action plans and other reporting create inclusive policymaking[16].

The upwards trend of the positive course since 2013 is reflected through the examples and practices of local governments. Municipalities provide halls for LGBTI+ civil society organizations’ activities, organize events to celebrate important days and weeks for LGBTI+ culture, change the cities’ inclusivity of LGBTI+ by preparing local equality action plans, and commit to protocols on conducting LGBTI+ friendly local governance. On the other hand, the right-wing populist understanding poses a threat to this course. It should be noted that the human rights of LGBTI+s are above any political formations. Local governments need to face this reality, establish and expand visible LGBTI+ policies and activities. In addition to this, local governments should raise their voices against moralistic, outdated, anti-LGBTI+ and hateful rhetoric that tries to pacify them, subject them to accusations and threats, and hinder local efforts for achieving equality. Considering the issues, LGBTI+ organizations and local governments bear many responsibilities, in conclusion. Local governments should be encouraged to reflect their organizational views and attitudes on LGBTI+ policies and prepare the ground to follow the LGBTI+ organizations’ roadmap of “Another local government is possible” through transforming local governance into inclusive and equal bodies. For this reason, local governments should remember the work they have done in the past, influence each other, be in solidarity with the LGBTI+s of the city and give voice to the demands of the LGBTI+s.

*This article was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of Kaos GL Association and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.

*The article was originally written and published at KaosGL.org in Turkish and translated to English by Yiğit Mahmutoğlu.

Tags: life