Aims

This thesis aims to contextualise the experiences of non-heterosexual asylum seekers within international human rights law and practice, and specifically, within the UK asylum system. It seeks to expose and understand the lacuna of information in the documentation of homophobic persecution, the absence of sexual sensitivity in refugee determination procedures and the failure of stakeholders to identify and meet the specific social needs of non-heterosexual asylum seekers.

Methodology

Empirical data is primarily drawn from the author's work as an Asylum Case Worker with the London-based Asylum Task Group of Outrage, a lesbian and gay human rights organisation. In addition, semi-structured interviews were conducted and personal communications entered into with gay and lesbian asylum seekers and refugees, an immigration barrister, asylum advisers, and a representative of the U.K. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees based at the Home Office. This fieldwork took place in London between February and August 2006. The thesis also reviews literature on human rights, gender and sexual rights and specific case studies relating to sexual orientation and refugee law from both the UK and worldwide.

Key findings

This essay argues that as lesbians and gay men are disadvantaged by and excluded from a human rights agenda constituted by the interests and concerns of heterosexuals, so they are equally and consequentially excluded from protection under its subsidiary, international refugee law. Critiquing the institutionalisation and naturalisation of heterosexuality within both human rights [encompassing refugee protection] and the British national imaginary, the paper exposes the inherent heterosexual bias of human rights law and the heterosexist context in which claims are adjudicated as key barriers to bringing sexuality-based claims within refugee law. The posited heteronormativity of human rights law and the heterosexist, white and non-nomadic construction of Britishness, are then applied to current legal obstacles facing non-heterosexuals in the UK asylum system - credibility assessments, sexuality as activity, the persecution standard and discretion requirement - to explain British hostility towards non-heterosexual asylum claims.

Conclusions and recommendations

In conclusion, it is argued that recognising sexual rights as human rights calls not for a rejection but a reconceptualisation of international human rights. Attempts to fit lesbian and gay asylum and human rights claims into a heteronormative framework are eschewed in favour of queering international human rights law to fully incorporate the identities and experiences of non-heterosexuals and to respond to sexualities that are more diverse and central to humanity than currently considered. This paper does not make concrete and specific recommendations to identified stakeholders on fulfilling the legal rights and meeting the social needs of non-heterosexual asylum seekers in the UK. The development of such practical guidelines is an essential area for further research and key to raising awareness of and positively transforming the lives and experiences of lesbian and gay asylum seekers in the UK.