There’s nothing revolutionary in condemning extrajudiciary executions, and when you find out things like the removal of the sexual orientation as a consideration in a UN resolution, that baffles me, to put it mildly. Even considering (with sheer repulse) that being gay could be a crime, the UN resolution denies the right of a fair trial to the LGBT population. Where in the world is this acceptable nowadays? Thanks to Mr. Thor Halvorssen, we know where it is.
Colombia likes to fancy herself as a human-rights-sensitive country, even if her record of violations and related impunity is horrendous. Where left Colombia its principles in this particular situation? Shame on her UN representatives and her new government, which BTW likes to point there is new consideration for the victims of an almost 60-year internal conflict.
I’m not against the UN per se, but I really dislike the opacity of its procedures, the lack of accountability and the non-existent information about how this organization operates. In moments like these, it would be handy to know what is really going inside UN (a case of the Wikileaks wouldn’t be bad at all), or the charter and everything else of this leviathan should be rethinked from scratch.
- Thor Halvorssen: United Nations: It’s Okay to Kill Gays (huffingtonpost.com)
- US To Fight for LGBT Inclusion in UN Anti-Execution Resolution (lezgetreal.com)
- Who Voted For LGBT Executions? (anadder.com)
- How the United Nations Failed LGBT People This Week (gayrights.change.org)