From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of the LGBT rights series
Marriage

Recognized

Civil unions and
registered partnerships
Minimal recognition
Unclear legal status
See also
Notes
  1. GR: Neither performed nor recognized in the Monastic community of Mount Athos.
  2. KoN: Performed in the Netherlands proper, including the Caribbean Netherlands. Registered in Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten in such cases, but the rights of marriage are not guaranteed.
  3. NZ: Neither performed nor recognized in Niue, Tokelau, or the Cook Islands.
  4. UK: Neither performed nor recognized in six British Overseas Territories.
  5. US: Neither performed nor recognized in some tribal nations. Recognized but not performed in several other tribal nations and American Samoa.
  6. Israel: Registered foreign marriages confer all marriage rights. Domestic common-law marriages confer most rights of marriage. Domestic civil marriage recognized by some cities.
  7. EU: The Coman v. Romania ruling of the European Court of Justice obliges the state to provide residency rights for the foreign spouses of EU citizens. All EU member states except Romania follow the ruling.
  8. Cambodia: Recognition of a "declaration of family relationship", which may be useful in matters such as housing, but they are not legally binding.
  9. China: Guardianship agreements, conferring some limited legal benefits, including decisions about medical and personal care.
  10. HK: Inheritance, guardianship rights, and residency rights for foreign spouses of legal residents.
  11. India: Courts have recognised guru–shishya, nata pratha or maitri karar–type contractual relationships, but they are not legally binding.
  12. Japan: Some cities and prefectures issue partnership certificates, but they are not legally binding.
  13. Namibia: Marriages conducted abroad between a Namibian national and a foreign spouse recognized for residency rights.
  14. Romania: Hospital visitation rights through a "legal representative" status.
* Not yet in effect
LGBT portal

Suriname does not recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions.

Background

The Constitution of Suriname does not explicitly ban same-sex marriage, nor does it mention the institution of marriage as a whole. Article 15 of the Constitution guarantees the right to found a family: "The family is recognized and protected." [1] However, article 80 of the Civil Code states: "By marriage, a man can only be married to one woman, and a woman can only be married to one man." [a]

In a 2014 report issued to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, four LGBT advocacy groups wrote, "Family laws in Suriname define marriage as the union between a man and a woman. LGBTI persons are not allowed to marry persons of the same sex. Considering that same-sex marriage is illegal, same-sex couples cannot be granted other rights which would result from such a legal union. Among other things, they therefore cannot inherit property or goods from a deceased partner as married opposite-sex couples can. In the recent Pension Act, married and unmarried opposite-sex couples are entitled to the pension of their deceased partner. Even though the Pension Act does not explicitly exclude same-sex partners of the same rights as opposite-sex partners, the Government has publicly stated in Parliament that the Pension Act would not include same-sex partnerships." [3]

2018 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling

Recognition of same-sex unions in South America
  Marriage
  Other type of partnership
  Country subject to IACHR ruling
  Unrecognized
  Constitution limits marriage to opposite-sex couples
  Same-sex sexual activity illegal, though penalties not enforced

On 9 January 2018, in advisory opinion OC 24/7, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) ruled that countries signatory to the American Convention on Human Rights are required to allow same-sex couples to marry. [4] [5] The ruling states that: [6] [7]

The State must recognize and guarantee all rights derived from a family bond between persons of the same sex in accordance with the provisions of Articles 11.2 and 17.1 of the American Convention. (...) in accordance with articles 1.1, 2, 11.2, 17, and 24 of the American Convention, it is necessary to guarantee access to all the existing figures in domestic legal systems, including the right to marry. (..) To ensure the protection of all the rights of families formed by same-sex couples, without discrimination with respect to those that are constituted by heterosexual couples.

Suriname ratified the American Convention on Human Rights on 12 November 1987 and also recognized the court's jurisdiction that same day. [8]

Reaction and aftermath

LGBT activists responded to the court ruling by calling on the government to legalize same-sex marriage, though said they believed the "country's not ready for LGBT rights". [9]

In February 2023, the Constitutional Court ruled that the ban on same-sex marriage does not violate the Constitution or Suriname's obligations under the American Convention on Human Rights. However, the court also found that the Civil Code is outdated and needs to be modernized following public debate. This lawsuit was filed by a same-sex couples who had married in Argentina in 2018 and sought recognition of their marriage back home in Suriname. The Central Bureau of Civil Affairs had refused to recognize their Argentine marriage license. Following the decision, the couple said it was "very remarkable and strange that the Constitutional Court [has] ignore[d] the judgment of the American Court of Human Rights". Likewise, local human rights activist Carla Bakboord said "it is incomprehensible that the Constitutional Court [has] come to such a ruling. When the Court is abundantly clear about discrimination and the subordination of Surinamese legislation to that of international treaties, you do indeed expect the review to turn out to be different from this. I am very surprised." [10]

Public opinion

A 2010 opinion poll carried out by Vanderbilt University showed that 10.3% of the Surinamese population supported same-sex marriage. [11]

Notes

  1. ^ Dutch: De man kan tegelijkertijd slechts met en vrouw, de vrouw slechts met en man door het huwelijk verbonden zijn. [2]

See also

References

  1. ^ "Suriname's Constitution of 1987 with Amendments through 1992" (PDF). constituteproject.org. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
  2. ^ "Burgerlijk Wetboek" (PDF). dna.dr (in Dutch). Retrieved 6 July 2023.
  3. ^ "Human Rights Situation for LGBTI Persons and Sexual Rights in the Republic of Suriname" (PDF). rmozone. December 2014.
  4. ^ Pretel, Enrique Andres (January 10, 2018). "Latin American human rights court urges same-sex marriage legalization". Reuters. Archived from the original on June 2, 2020. Retrieved January 12, 2018.
  5. ^ Chinchilla, Sofía; Cambronero, Natasha (January 9, 2018). "Corte Interamericana ordena abrir la puerta al matrimonio gay en Costa Rica" (in Spanish). La Nación. Archived from the original on June 2, 2020. Retrieved June 2, 2020.
  6. ^ "Opinión Consultiva OC-24/17 de 24 de Noviembre de 2017 Solicitada por la República de Costa Rica" (PDF) (in Spanish). Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Archived (PDF) from the original on June 2, 2020. Retrieved June 2, 2020.
  7. ^ Contesse, Jorge (July 26, 2018). "The Inter-American Court of Human Rights' Advisory Opinion on Gender Identity and Same-Sex Marriage". American Society of International Law. Archived from the original on June 5, 2020. Retrieved June 5, 2020.
  8. ^ "Annual Report of the IACHR 2001 - Annex III". cidh.org (in Spanish).
  9. ^ "Suriname Status of Marriage Law & History of Pro-Marriage Efforts". Somos Familias. Retrieved 6 July 2023.
  10. ^ "LGBTQIA-gemeenschap krijgt bittere pil te slikken". de Ware Tijd (in Dutch). 2023-02-01. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  11. ^ Support for Same‐Sex Marriage in Latin America
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Suriname&oldid=1163823401"