...because 'gays must be free to enjoy Kylie concerts and cocktails'
~~~~~~ what next
Kylie Minogue was named by the judge as a key element of gay culture
Gay asylum seekers must be 'free to enjoy themselves going to Kylie concerts and drinking exotically coloured cocktails' without fear of persecution, a senior judge declared yesterday.
Lord Rodger's extraordinary comments came in a judgment which could allow thousands of homosexuals to claim asylum in Britain.
He said they should have the same rights to display their sexuality as straight men who 'play rugby, drink beer and talk about girls with their mates'.
The Home Office has been refusing asylum claims by gay men on the grounds they could hide their sexuality - and therefore avoid persecution at home - by behaving discreetly.
But, in test cases brought by men from Cameroon and Iran, three Supreme Court judges unanimously ruled the policy was a breach of the UN Convention on Refugees.
It sets the precedent that no gay man should be returned to a country which treats homosexuality harshly on the expectation they will 'act straight'.
Lord Rodger, one of the most senior judges in Britain, said gay men had a right to 'live openly and freely'.
The Government - which had already promised to review its treatment of homosexual asylum seekers - welcomed the ruling, as did gay rights and refugee groups.
Home Secretary Theresa May said: 'We have already promised to stop the removal of asylum seekers who have had to leave particular countries because their sexual orientation or gender identification puts them at proven risk of imprisonment, torture or execution.
'I do not believe it is acceptable to send people home and expect them to hide their sexuality to avoid persecution.'
But critics warned it could lead to the UK - which is among the first nations to take such a position - becoming a leading destination for asylum seekers who are claiming to be gay.
Supreme Court ruling: Two gay asylum seekers from Iran and Cameroon have won the right to asylum in Britain
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: 'This could lead to a potentially massive expansion of asylum claims as it could apply to literally millions of people around the world.
'An applicant has now only to show that he - or she - is homosexual and intends to return and live openly in one of the many countries where it is illegal to be granted asylum in the UK.
'The judges are no doubt interpreting the letter of the international convention correctly but the consequences are potentially huge.
'The principle of asylum is, rightly, widely supported but it should be a matter of domestic law.'
Judgment: Lord Rodger (left) and Deputy President of The Supreme Court Lord Hope (right). Standing behind is Lord Mance, who did not sit on the case
The Government had already promised to review the policy before the Supreme Court ruling. One of the men involved, known as 'T', appealed against a decision that he could return to his native Cameroon, despite the fact that he was attacked by a mob after he was seen kissing a male partner.
The other, 'J' from Iran, was told he could be expected to tolerate conditions arising from his homosexual relationship in his home country, and should behave discreetly to avoid reprisals.
Punishment for homosexual acts ranges from public flogging to execution in Iran, and in Cameroon jail sentences for homosexuality range from six months to five years.
The Court of Appeal had found both men could conceal their sexuality to avoid the risk of being persecuted and neither had a 'well-founded fear of persecution' which entitled them to protection under the UN Convention on Refugees.
But the Supreme Court the test applied by the Court of Appeal was contrary to the UN convention and should not be followed in the future.
Both cases will be sent back for reconsideration in light of the guidance from the Supreme Court.
The Home Office said all future cases will be dealt with under the new rules - as will any appeals.
Liberal Democrat deputy leader Simon Hughes said: 'I am delighted this ruling recognises the rights of gay asylum seekers, ensuring their freedom from persecution around the world.
'Other countries around the world must now follow the UK's lead and recognise freedom of expression and freedom of sexuality for all people.'
Donna Covey, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: 'It is about time refugees fleeing their countries because of persecution over their sexuality are acknowledged as being legitimately in need of safety here, in line with those fleeing other human rights abuses.'
Briefing: Homosexuality and the law worldwide
There are more than 75 countries where homosexuality is illegal.This can range from the outlawing of gay sex to - in the most hardline countries - the banning of holding hands, kissing or any other public act of affection.
This makes it inevitable, as Lord Hope said yesterday, that 'more and more' gay asylum seekers would seek protection in the UK.
The judge, who sat alongside Lord Rodger on the Supreme Court panel, predicted they would come from countries across Sub-Saharan Africa, where evangelical Christian churches engage in 'rampant homophobic teaching'.
He added that homosexual men and women are also certain to flee here from Muslim nations where there is an ' ultraconservative interpretation of Islamic law', such as Iran. Other countries singled out by the judgment included Malawi and Uganda.
The Home Office insists it is impossible to work out precisely what the impact of the ruling will be because there are no hard and fast rules governing asylum claims.
For example, it does not automatically follow that a person fleeing a country where it is illegal to be gay will be granted asylum, because some countries do not bother to enforce their laws.
The key element is whether or not they are at risk of being 'persecuted'. Normally, this will mean by the state - such as imprisonment.
But it can also mean a person is at risk of being persecuted by their fellow citizens, while the police do nothing to protect them - a claim successfully made by a number of Jamaican asylum seekers.
The Home Office says it does not log how many asylum claims - there were 24,550 last year - were based on sexual persecution-But Stonewall, the gay rights group, says the refusal rate for gay claimants was 97 per cent - compared with 77 per cent for applications as a whole.
What is certain is this 97 per cent figure will now plummet. But the danger, Migrationwatch claims, is that not all of the thousands of beneficiaries will be genuine.
Rather, the group says, they will be claiming to be gay in the knowledge that - if they are from a country where homosexuality is persecuted - they will not be sent home.
It is difficult to say whether the ruling makes Britain more or less strict than its European neighbours.
All are signatories to the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees. But it is up to their individual courts to decide how rigidly this is interpreted.
The Supreme Court in the UK believes the ruling brings us more closely in line with other countries.
------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~ what next
Kylie Minogue was named by the judge as a key element of gay cultureGay asylum seekers must be 'free to enjoy themselves going to Kylie concerts and drinking exotically coloured cocktails' without fear of persecution, a senior judge declared yesterday.
Lord Rodger's extraordinary comments came in a judgment which could allow thousands of homosexuals to claim asylum in Britain.
He said they should have the same rights to display their sexuality as straight men who 'play rugby, drink beer and talk about girls with their mates'.
The Home Office has been refusing asylum claims by gay men on the grounds they could hide their sexuality - and therefore avoid persecution at home - by behaving discreetly.
But, in test cases brought by men from Cameroon and Iran, three Supreme Court judges unanimously ruled the policy was a breach of the UN Convention on Refugees.
It sets the precedent that no gay man should be returned to a country which treats homosexuality harshly on the expectation they will 'act straight'.
Lord Rodger, one of the most senior judges in Britain, said gay men had a right to 'live openly and freely'.
The Government - which had already promised to review its treatment of homosexual asylum seekers - welcomed the ruling, as did gay rights and refugee groups.
Home Secretary Theresa May said: 'We have already promised to stop the removal of asylum seekers who have had to leave particular countries because their sexual orientation or gender identification puts them at proven risk of imprisonment, torture or execution.
'I do not believe it is acceptable to send people home and expect them to hide their sexuality to avoid persecution.'
But critics warned it could lead to the UK - which is among the first nations to take such a position - becoming a leading destination for asylum seekers who are claiming to be gay.
Supreme Court ruling: Two gay asylum seekers from Iran and Cameroon have won the right to asylum in BritainSir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: 'This could lead to a potentially massive expansion of asylum claims as it could apply to literally millions of people around the world.
'An applicant has now only to show that he - or she - is homosexual and intends to return and live openly in one of the many countries where it is illegal to be granted asylum in the UK.
'The judges are no doubt interpreting the letter of the international convention correctly but the consequences are potentially huge.
'The principle of asylum is, rightly, widely supported but it should be a matter of domestic law.'
Judgment: Lord Rodger (left) and Deputy President of The Supreme Court Lord Hope (right). Standing behind is Lord Mance, who did not sit on the caseThe Government had already promised to review the policy before the Supreme Court ruling. One of the men involved, known as 'T', appealed against a decision that he could return to his native Cameroon, despite the fact that he was attacked by a mob after he was seen kissing a male partner.
The other, 'J' from Iran, was told he could be expected to tolerate conditions arising from his homosexual relationship in his home country, and should behave discreetly to avoid reprisals.
Punishment for homosexual acts ranges from public flogging to execution in Iran, and in Cameroon jail sentences for homosexuality range from six months to five years.
The Court of Appeal had found both men could conceal their sexuality to avoid the risk of being persecuted and neither had a 'well-founded fear of persecution' which entitled them to protection under the UN Convention on Refugees.
But the Supreme Court the test applied by the Court of Appeal was contrary to the UN convention and should not be followed in the future.
Both cases will be sent back for reconsideration in light of the guidance from the Supreme Court.
The Home Office said all future cases will be dealt with under the new rules - as will any appeals.
Liberal Democrat deputy leader Simon Hughes said: 'I am delighted this ruling recognises the rights of gay asylum seekers, ensuring their freedom from persecution around the world.
'Other countries around the world must now follow the UK's lead and recognise freedom of expression and freedom of sexuality for all people.'
Donna Covey, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: 'It is about time refugees fleeing their countries because of persecution over their sexuality are acknowledged as being legitimately in need of safety here, in line with those fleeing other human rights abuses.'
Briefing: Homosexuality and the law worldwide
There are more than 75 countries where homosexuality is illegal.This can range from the outlawing of gay sex to - in the most hardline countries - the banning of holding hands, kissing or any other public act of affection.
This makes it inevitable, as Lord Hope said yesterday, that 'more and more' gay asylum seekers would seek protection in the UK.
The judge, who sat alongside Lord Rodger on the Supreme Court panel, predicted they would come from countries across Sub-Saharan Africa, where evangelical Christian churches engage in 'rampant homophobic teaching'.
He added that homosexual men and women are also certain to flee here from Muslim nations where there is an ' ultraconservative interpretation of Islamic law', such as Iran. Other countries singled out by the judgment included Malawi and Uganda.
The Home Office insists it is impossible to work out precisely what the impact of the ruling will be because there are no hard and fast rules governing asylum claims.
For example, it does not automatically follow that a person fleeing a country where it is illegal to be gay will be granted asylum, because some countries do not bother to enforce their laws.
The key element is whether or not they are at risk of being 'persecuted'. Normally, this will mean by the state - such as imprisonment.
But it can also mean a person is at risk of being persecuted by their fellow citizens, while the police do nothing to protect them - a claim successfully made by a number of Jamaican asylum seekers.
The Home Office says it does not log how many asylum claims - there were 24,550 last year - were based on sexual persecution-But Stonewall, the gay rights group, says the refusal rate for gay claimants was 97 per cent - compared with 77 per cent for applications as a whole.
What is certain is this 97 per cent figure will now plummet. But the danger, Migrationwatch claims, is that not all of the thousands of beneficiaries will be genuine.
Rather, the group says, they will be claiming to be gay in the knowledge that - if they are from a country where homosexuality is persecuted - they will not be sent home.
It is difficult to say whether the ruling makes Britain more or less strict than its European neighbours.
All are signatories to the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees. But it is up to their individual courts to decide how rigidly this is interpreted.
The Supreme Court in the UK believes the ruling brings us more closely in line with other countries.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment