The influence of judical practice on the Legislation in the Sphere of LGBT Community Rights
Abstract
In the light of the announced adoption of the Law on Same-Sex Unions, the question arises whether the draft law is in accordance with the Constitution, especially after the announcements that the law will not be signed. Although the Constitution specifies that marriage is a union of a man and a woman, experts point out that in this case it is not a law on marriage and family, nor does it provide for the possibility of adoption of children by same-sex couples, but that it regulates property, health, pension and other legal relationships of same-sex partners living in the union. At the same time, many public figures have invited traditional religious communities to react in order to defend the “right to freedom and future of the people”, emphasizing that contentious issues related to the regulation of mutual rights and obligations of same-sex couples could be resolved by amending the existing laws in those areas. In the countries where similar laws exist, case law has played a significant role, just as various medical and psychological associations. The European case law is not uniform, and cases often end before the European Court of Human Rights, while in the United States at the federal level, all anti-homosexual laws are repealed by a Supreme Court decision (Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 [2003]). Nevertheless, there is no single law in this area and the rights of same-sex couples vary from country to country. The paper will provide an overview of significant court decisions in this area in European countries, as well as the decisions of the US Supreme Court, which may lead us to think about the possible legal consequences of (non)adoption of the disputed Law on Same-Sex Unions, about procedures that could be initiated if partners decided to request judicial protection for the purpose of recognizing their guaranteed human rights, as well as the content and significance of such court judgments.
References
Antonić, S. (2014). Power and Sexuality – the Sociology of the Gay Movement. Istočno Sarajevo: Sociološko društvo Republike Srpske. Available at: https://fedorabg.bg.ac.rs/fedora/get/o:7605/bdef:Content/download [In Serbian]
Baker v. Nelson, 191 N.W.2d 185 (1971). Available at: https://law.justia.com/cases/minnesota/supreme-court/1971/43009-1.html
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale,530 US 640 (2000). Available at: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/530/640/
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Available at: https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/european_government/eu_law/charter_of_fundamental_rights.html
Constitution of the Republic of Serbia (2006). Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije 98/2006. [In Serbian]
Čović, A. (2015). Experience of LGBT parents and their children: The results of longitudinal studies, Sociološki pregled, 49 (4), 399–418. DOI: 10.5937/socpreg1504399C [In Serbian]
Čović, A. (2020). Family Law Aspects of Religious Marriages. Beograd: Institut za uporedno pravo [In Serbian]
Draft Law on Same-Sex Unions, Available at: https://www.paragraf.rs/dnevne-vesti/080321/080321-vest18.html [In Serbian]
E. B. v. France, (2008). No. 43546/02, Available at: https://advokat-prnjavorac.com/zakoni/EB-protiv-Francuske.pdf [In Bosnian]
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950). Službeni list SCG – Međunarodni ugovori 9/2003. [In Serbian]
European Parliament Resolution no. A5-0050 / 2000 of 16 March 2000. Available at:https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P5-TA-2000-0113+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN
Family Law, Službeni glasnik RS 18/2005, 72/2011, 6/2015. [In Serbian]
Frette v. France, (2002), no. 36515/97, Available at: https://www.equalrightstrust.org/ertdocumentbank/frette%20v%20france.pdf
Gas and Dubois v. France, (2012), no. 25951/07, Available at: https://ordoiuris.hr/predmetgas-i-dubois-protiv-francuske/ [In Croatian]
Ladele v. Islington LBC (2009) EWCA Civ 1357. Available at: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7a160d03e7f57eb07f4
Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination, Službeni glasnik RS 22/2009. [In Serbian]
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 US 558 (2003), Available at: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/558/
LOI n° 2013-404 du 17 mai 2013 ouvrant le mariage aux couples de personnes de même sexe
Mac Donald, S. “Cardinal Marx: Society must create structures to respect gay right”. (28th June 2016). Available at: https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/cardinal-marx-society-must-create-structures-respect-gay-rights
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), Available at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf
McFarlane v. Relate Avon Ltd. (2010) EWCA Civ. 880. Available at: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/880.html
Nikolić, O. (2015). Freedom of Religion in the United Kingdom. Strani pravni život, 1/2015, 71–83. [In Serbian]
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 US 644 (2015), Available at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
One, Incorporated, v. Otto K. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371 (1958), Available at: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/355/371/
Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996), Available at: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/517/620/
Šuvaković, U. (2013). Marriage and Family in Transition. In Krstić M. (ed.) Individual, family, society in transition. Kosovska Mitrovica: Filozofski fakultet u Prištini. Available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XKaFqM8vFKbeMRez72vbNUT0K3gF6SDY/view [In Serbian]
Šuvaković, U. (2020). The Family through the Program Attitudes of Political Parties in Serbia: A Section of the Situation in the Second Decade of the XXI Century, Srpska politička misao, 3/2020, 43-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22182/spm.6932020.2 [In Serbian]
United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744 (2013), Available at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf